A Dog Pissing at the Edge of a Path: Animal Metaphors in an Eastern Indonesian Society 9780228000044

Citation preview

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page i

A DOG PISSING AT THE EDGE OF A PATH

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page ii

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page iii

G R E G O RY F O RT H

A DOG PI SSI NG AT THE EDGE OF A PATH Animal Metaphors in an Eastern Indonesian Society

McGill-Queen’s University Press Montreal & Kingston

•

London

•

Chicago

© McGill-Queen’s University Press 2019 isbn 978-0-7735-5922-6 (cloth) isbn 978-0-7735-5923-3 (paper) isbn 978-0-2280-0004-4 (epdf) isbn 978-0-2280-0005-1 (epub) Legal deposit fourth quarter 2019 Bibliothèque nationale du Québec Printed in Canada on acid-free paper that is 100% ancient forest free (100% post-consumer recycled), processed chlorine free

We acknowledge the support of the Canada Council for the Arts. Nous remercions le Conseil des arts du Canada de son soutien.

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Title: A dog pissing at the edge of a path : animal metaphors in an eastern Indonesian society / Gregory Forth. Names: Forth, Gregory, author. Description: Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: Canadiana (print) 20190171820 | Canadiana (ebook) 20190171944 | isbn 9780773559226 (cloth) | isbn 9780773559233 (paper) | isbn 9780228000044 (epdf) | isbn 9780228000051 (epub) Subjects: lcsh: Metaphor—Social aspects—Indonesia—Flores Island. | lcsh: Animals—Social aspects—Indonesia—Flores Island. | lcsh: Human-animal relationships—Indonesia—Flores Island. | lcsh: Nage (Indonesian people)—Social life and customs. | lcsh: Nage (Indonesian people)—Ethnozoology—Indonesia— Flores Island. Classification: lcc p301.5.m48 f67 2019 | ddc 306.442/99221—dc23

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page v

For my wife, Christine

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page vi

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page vii

Contents

Figures and Tables Preface

•

ix

•

xi

Note on Orthography 1 Introductory Matters

xv

•

•

3

2 Metaphors and “Metaphor” in Human-Animal Relations 3 Domestic Mammal Metaphors – and Some Wild Variants 4 Mammals in Metaphor: Exclusively Wild Kinds 5 Talking with Birds

•

•

28

• •

53

122

161

6 Other Non-Mammals in Metaphor: Snakes, Lizards, Fish, Frogs, and More

243

•

7 Metaphors with Bugs: Insects and Other Invertebrates

•

279

8 The Differential Metaphorical Value of Different Animals

•

310

9 Animal Metaphors in Social and Ontological Perspective

•

336

Notes

•

365

References Index

•

•

381

371

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page viii

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page ix

Figures and Tables

Figures All photographs taken by author unless otherwise specified. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Buffalo with a nose-ring (No. 7) • 56 “Dove” and “buffalo” coconuts (No. 25) • 66 Horses about to be led to pasture (No. 40) • 71 Balinese cow (No. 60) • 80 Goat on a rock (No. 74) • 87 Newly acquired dog, chained (No. 103) • 99 Sow with piglets (No. 123) • 107 Slaughtering pigs in the traditional manner (No. 127) • 109 Cat with a bent tail (No. 144) • 115 Hunters at a shrine, annual ritual hunt (No. 163) • 123 Porcupines in a cage (No. 172) • 128 Dog with Giant rat (No. 176) • 131 Hunter with Giant rat (No. 179) • 132 “Rat’s tail” (No. 196) • 140 Pet civet (No. 206) • 145 “Civet’s vulva” (No. 208) • 147 Pet monkey (No. 231) • 155 Tethered cock with owner (No. 260) • 170 Male speckled fowl (No. 281) • 179 Fantail (No. 332). Donna McKinnon • 199 Man with “Fantail’s Tail” hair (No. 334) • 200

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page x

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Friarbird (No. 337). Donna McKinnon • 203 Junglefowl cock (No. 365) • 215 Injured Black-naped oriole (No. 387) • 224 Young Barred doves (No. 401) • 230 “Dove droppings” (No. 408) • 233 Waterhen (No. 416) • 238 Viper tree (No. 433) • 251 Grasshopper eggs motif (No. 496) • 282 Gourd-shell vessels (No. 532) • 297 Tables

1 2 3 4

x

Totals of metaphors involving different mammals • 160 Examples of synonymity in animal metaphors • 318–19 Cultural factors motivating animal metaphors • 325 Human values in animal metaphors: life forms and selected individual categories • 340–1

F I G U R E S A N D TA B L E S

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xi

Preface

This book started off as a remnant of another (Forth 2016). When some years ago I began writing a monograph on the folk zoology of the Nage people of eastern Indonesia – the various kinds of knowledge they possessed concerning non-human animals – I planned to include a comprehensive coverage of animal metaphors. However, it soon became apparent that Nage animal metaphors were far too numerous to treat adequately in that volume, and that a separate book would be in order. Especially from further field research conducted between 2014 and 2018, I also realized that I had rather more to say about how Nage understood metaphor and about the concept of metaphor in general. More particularly, it became clear that the Nage regard standard (or “conventional”) animal metaphors, including the majority that use animals to talk about humans and human behaviours, ultimately as fictions. That is, they recognize that a person spoken of as a “dog pissing at the edge of a path,” say, is not really a dog nor, by virtue of certain actions, has she or he temporarily become a dog. And conversely, they know that using dogs and other animals to speak about humans – the fact that humans and animals can be brought together in this manner – does not mean that these creatures are in some essential sense human. Expressed another way, people in this small-scale eastern Indonesian community of cultivators, hunters, and raisers of livestock understand their metaphors in much the same way as Westerners understand theirs – as special ways of speaking and not as articulations of radically different ways of experiencing the world. In fact, many Nage metaphors are closely comparable to animal metaphors found in English, if not always in regard to the animals

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xii

employed, then in specific animal behaviours or interpretations recognized by their users – a finding that should attract the attention of anyone interested in human cognition and human universals. Readers will thus discover, for example, that both in English and in the language of a small eastern Indonesian island, muscles are referred to with words that ultimately mean “mouse”; that duplicity is conveyed by an animal (the monitor lizard) with a forked tongue; that the straight tail of a civet stands for honesty; and that the dog metaphor from which this book takes its title is closely comparable to the anglophone expression “to piss about.” To many readers, or at least many of those who are not anthropologists, this finding may not come as much of a surprise. However, in recent years a number of anthropologists have advanced a view of metaphor as a peculiarly Western concept that many of their colleagues have unwittingly imposed on their ethnographic subjects. What is more, writers who have been described as “ontological pluralists” (discussed at some length in chapter 9) have argued that non-Westerners – or some ill-defined portion of them – understand the contrast of “human” and “animal” in a fundamentally different way from modern Westerners. It has further been suggested that such people do not possess animal metaphors, at least not in the sense this term is understood in reference to English (or European language) usage. My aim in this book is to demonstrate, through an extensive and detailed exploration of the animal metaphors of one non-Western society – one I know particularly well from some thirty-five years of field research – that this view is fundamentally incorrect. Although I am an anthropologist, this book is not written exclusively for anthropologists but, rather, for anyone interested in the topic of metaphor. As such it should appeal to several different audiences. In addition to anthropologists and linguists concerned either with the phenomenon or concept of metaphor, more specialist readers would include philosophers of language, Southeast Asianists, people involved in the study of specific languages and literatures, and – since Nage animal metaphors employ 140 animal kinds, the large majority corresponding to single species – perhaps even zoologists, ethologists, and ecologists. Regardless of specific disciplinary interests, moreover, the book is constructed as a comparative resource, a reference work of sorts, for anyone interested in any aspect of animal metaphors. Indeed, I very much wish I had had something similar available for a language other than English while researching and writing the present volume.

xii

P R E FA C E

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xiii

On the other hand, more general readers might read the book simply to discover similarities and differences between the animal metaphors of a small eastern Indonesian community and those with which they are familiar from their own language, which is most likely to be English. By the same token, the 566 metaphors that compose the core of the book could be read mainly for pleasure; in fact, many may be found not only insightful and imaginative but also aesthetically appealing and, in some instances, even humorous – thus replicating an assessment by Nage people themselves. Such readers might therefore leave the first two and the last two chapters and proceed directly to chapters 3 to 7. Nevertheless, I hope that, however readers’ interests are motivated, a perusal of individual metaphors will encourage them to turn to the general discussions on the nature of metaphor (and especially animal metaphors) found in the first two and last two chapters. Whatever success can be claimed for the present study is due mainly to the generous assistance of Nage friends and associates who, for three and a half decades, have allowed me to participate in many aspects of their lives. It would be impossible to mention everyone who, knowingly or unknowingly, has provided me with insight into Nage metaphors. Nevertheless, special thanks are owed to several regular commentators, including (in no particular order): Fidelis Laja Ga’e, Theresia Mea Béli, Joseph Méze Bha, Agnes Wula Meno, Fidelis Lowa Sada, Cornelis Kodhi Léjo, Gaspar Wélu Déde, Laurens Toda, Yohanes Soda Ule, Stefanus Ngato, Rofina Ule, Petrus Lape Ga’e, David Waghi, Arnoldus Nuwa Bupu, Ambrosius Busa, and Petronela Bolo. In addition, I wish to give separate mention to four men who helped me, not just with my study of metaphor but with a variety of ethnographic investigations, but who, sadly, died during the course of my research – namely, Emiel Waso Ea (decd. 1994), Thomas Cola Bha (2008), Eperadus Dhoi Léwa (2018), and Cyrilus Bau Engo (also 2018). I am also grateful to the editorial staff at McGill-Queen’s University Press and especially to editor-in-chief Jonathan Crago, who from the beginning has given me consistent support and encouragement and has expeditiously seen the manuscript through to final publication. Another debt is owed to two anonymous readers, who evidently expended considerable time and effort in reviewing the manuscript and offering suggestions for improvement. Field research for this project was funded mostly from grants awarded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Since 1984, when I first visited Nage country, research visits to Indonesia were sponsored

P R E FA C E

xiii

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xiv

by the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (lipi), Nusa Cendana and Artha Wacana Universities in Kupang, and St Paul’s Major Seminary in Ledalero, Flores. The assistance provided by all of these bodies is greatly appreciated. Finally, thanks are due to Donna McKinnon for producing line drawings of two birds I was unable to photograph: the fantail and the friarbird (figures 20 and 22). Gregory Forth January 2019

xiv

P R E FA C E

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xv

Note on Orthography

Vowels English comparisons are approximate: /a/ (as in “cat”) /é/ (as in “bay”) /e/ in the first syllable of bisyllabic words is the schwa, tending sometimes to a short /e/ as in English “get.” In monosyllables (e.g., me, “to bleat [of a goat]”) and in the second syllable of bisyllabic words (e.g., Nage, pronounced roughly as “Na-gay”) it is pronounced as /é/, as it is when followed or preceded by a glottal stop (as in le’e, “bow”). In these instances the sound is not written as é, in the interests of parsimony and also to accord with the practice of literate Nage themselves. /i/ (as in “fit”) /o/ (as in “dot”) /u/ (as in “root”) Consonants All consonants have approximately the same value they do in English, with the following exceptions: /bh/, an implosive /b/ /c/, pronounced as in “chat” /dh/, an implosive /d/

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xvi

/gh/, voiced velar fricative /ng/, always pronounced as in “singer,” never as in “finger” /’/ marks the glottal stop, which occurs only initially or between vowels (see ‘é’e, “ugly, plain”).

xvi

NOTE ON ORTHOGRAPHY

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 1

A DOG PISSING AT THE EDGE OF A PATH

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 2

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 3

1 Introductory Matters

English-speakers, and most likely speakers of any language, will be familiar with the common practice of calling people by an expression incorporating an animal name (English examples include “a rat,” “a fat pig,” “a sly fox”) or comparing someone to an animal (“strong as an ox,” “mad as a March hare”). They will also be aware that such expressions are commonly employed when describing the character, actions, attitudes, circumstances, abilities, or appearance of a human individual or human collectivity. I have written this book in the conviction that metaphors incorporating animals are an important part of any society’s knowledge of both non-human animals and of themselves, and are therefore essential to a comprehensive and properly informed understanding of a human community’s relations, both conceptual and practical, with fellow humans as well as with other zoological kinds. As a way people talk about other humans, there appears to be a widespread consensus that animal categories are an especially prominent, even the most prominent, kind of category deployed metaphorically the world over (e.g., Lawrence 1993, 301; see also Fernandez 1986, 11–14). Similar observations have been made concerning the very regular occurrence of animals in myth, augury, and other forms of cultural symbolism (Hunn 2011; Forth 2017a). By reviewing the metaphors of one non-Western society – a corpus of 566 expressions incorporating 140 different categories of mammals, birds, and animals of other kinds recorded over a period of more than thirty years – one purpose of this book is to shed light on this symbolic prominence. The people in question are the Nage (pronounced approximately as “Na-gay”), who inhabit the central part of the island of Flores in eastern Indonesia. More

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 4

particularly, I focus on a population of some twelve thousand people whom I have previously distinguished as “central Nage,” residing in the vicinity of the village of Bo’a Wae, the political and cultural centre of a larger region that, since colonial times, has been designated as Nage. All metaphors discussed below are therefore drawn from the dialect of central Nage (see Orthography), which, like all Flores Island languages, belongs to a grouping designated as Central-Malayo-Polynesian. As described in previous publications, central Nage people, although increasingly involved in a monetary economy, make their living as cultivators, raisers of livestock, and hunters. Rice grown in irrigated fields has for several decades been the principal crop, but Nage still plant maize and other cereals as well as a variety of tubers, green vegetables, fruits, and other cultigens. During roughly the same period, the majority of central Nage have converted to Roman Catholicism. Yet they maintain an indigenous spiritual cosmology and continue to perform associated rituals, and most Nage still observe traditional marriage rules and preferences, including clan or lineage exogamy, marriage within one of two hereditary ranks (sometimes described as “nobles” and “slaves”), and a modified system of asymmetric affinal alliance (requiring a strict distinction between “wife-givers” and “wife-takers”). Major rites involve animal sacrifice. The most valued sacrificial victims are water buffalo, animals that, together with horses and smaller livestock, continue to form a major and essential part of a bridewealth (goods given for a wife by the husband’s group), while pigs are an important part of the bride’s group’s counter-gift. Exploring various forms of knowledge and practice concerning both wild and domestic animals, Nage folk zoology is the subject of a recent book entitled Why the Porcupine Is Not a Bird (Forth 2016). A Dog Pissing at the Edge of a Path extends and complements that book, and references to the earlier work are made throughout. As literacy was introduced to Nage less than one hundred years ago, specifically by missionaries teaching partly in Dutch but mostly in Malay (the language that was to become the basis of the Indonesian national language), Nage are heirs to an exclusively oral tradition, and the metaphors I discuss below directly reflect this tradition. Apart from documenting several hundred metaphorical expressions and demonstrating the variety, complexity, and aesthetic and philosophical value of animal metaphors in use among members of a small-scale, non-Western society, the present book aims to address more general issues in the study of metaphor. One such issue concerns how

4

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 5

far the ultimately European concept of “metaphor” resonates in a very different language and tradition – or, otherwise expressed, it concerns the extent to which Nage metaphors correspond to what anglophones, say, would regard as metaphor, and how Nage ideas about these correspond to the Western concept of metaphor. In regard to animal metaphors specifically, a study of Nage usages further facilitates an exploration of what metaphors reveal about human-animal relations – for example, the place of metaphors in relation to knowledge of various kinds about non-human animals maintained by members of a particular society, and the part, practical or otherwise, that animals play in human lives. Yet another question concerns what metaphors may reveal about cultural variation in perceptions of differences and similarities between humans and non-human animals, and, moreover, how animal metaphors may reflect, but also inform, ideas about human behaviour, social values, and representations of different categories of people. All this bears on a particular issue in current anthropology – namely, the ontological question of whether, in what they say about and how they act towards animals, different societies display fundamental differences in conceptions of the relation between non-human animals and humans (see e.g., Descola 2013; Ingold 2011; Viveiros de Castro 2014). Investigating how a society’s standard metaphors can contribute to this debate is a major objective of this book. “Metaphor,” “Animal,” and Other Matters Using the term in a fairly broad sense, though more particularly as a reference to semantic relations (how words convey meanings), metaphor is pervasive in natural languages. One could go so far as to say that it is an aspect of most if not all linguistic utterances. To cite some familiar instances, in English one not only speaks, necessarily, of the “hands” of a clock, the “legs” of a table, or the “eye” of a needle but also of the “flow” of speech and the “root” of a problem or of a word. As these examples suggest, in any language many metaphors are not recognized as such, and in this connection we speak, again metaphorically, of “dead” as opposed to “living metaphors” – even though the difference between these is sometimes difficult to determine. (Does a clock really have “hands”?) “Metaphor” (ultimately from Greek metapherein, “transfer,” Shorter Oxford English Dictionary) can be defined as any representation in which a category

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

5

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 6

or concept from one semantic domain is transferred or carried over to a different domain. Thus, in the examples cited above, parts of the human body are transferred to the domains of chronometers and needles (both material artefacts), and a property of liquids is transferred to human speech or time (things that are immaterial or at least not directly visible). Questions have been raised about the delimitation of semantic domains and how far these might vary cross-culturally. Thus, some anthropologists might question whether non-Westerners conceive of human beings and non-human animals as belonging to two different “domains” or, if they do, whether the domains are distinguished in the same way as Westerners would distinguish them. These are matters I deal with later, but for the moment I would just mention that Nage ethnography reveals that these eastern Indonesians conceive of humans and animals as quite different sorts of beings, and that they appear to do so in much the same way as do ordinary speakers of English. Given that metaphor entails what are recognized as two different domains, the concept equally requires that things belonging to these domains are sufficiently similar and comparable that one can be employed to represent the other. Indeed, similarity and substitutability (the possibility of substituting one thing with another, e.g., a brave man with a lion) are the crucial features of metaphor that Roman Jakobson identifies in distinguishing metaphor as one of the two major forms of meaning creation in natural languages (see Jakobson and Halle 1956). The other is metonymy, which by contrast involves contiguity and displacement – as, for example, when “crown” refers to a monarch or the institution of monarchy. As this example also demonstrates, with metonymy a term and its referent belong to the same domain. As linguists and anthropologists are aware, these two categories have been treated as components of a longer series of “tropes” (types of figurative language) that further includes synecdoche and hyperbole. Yet metaphor and metonymy are regarded as the basic types, while synecdoche (using a particular instance to refer to a general entity or vice versa) and hyperbole (substituting a greater for a lesser quality or degree) can be understood as variants of metonymy, as perhaps can irony (replacing a thing with its contrary). At the same time, metaphor and metonymy have been applied to more than verbal utterances and especially to identify contrasting structural properties of representations expressed, for example, in ritual, myth, and spiritual cosmology. Regarding humans and animals, anthropologists will be familiar with interpretations of the Bororo identification of their men with red macaws (a species of parrot,

6

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 7

Ara macao) – an identification partly played out in ritual – as an idea grounded in both metaphoric and metonymic relations (Crocker 1977a; T. Turner 1991). Metonymy too has been treated as a variety of metaphor. If nothing else, this demonstrates the complexity (and lack of consistency) encountered in the analytical deployment of all these terms. However, when I speak of Nage “animal metaphors,” I use “metaphor” in the commonest sense to refer to conventional expressions in which statements describing animals or animal behaviours are used to talk about things that, for language-users, are not animals and that for the most part include human beings and attributes, behaviours, circumstances, and conditions differentially distributed or manifest among human individuals. By describing such expressions as “conventional” I follow Kövecses (2010, 33–4), who employs the term not to mean “arbitrary” (as in other linguistic and semiotic usage) but simply “well established and well entrenched” through regular use. Synonymous designations include Morgan’s (1993, 129) “institutionalized metaphor” and “stored metaphor,” defined as usages “with which everyone is familiar” and that, by contrast to metaphors that a person has not previously encountered, do not need “figuring out.” (At the same time, Morgan notes that conventional metaphors are not “idioms,” by which he means phrases that are not intelligible from analysis or translation of their parts and so must be comprehended as wholes.) Metaphors, including animal metaphors, can of course also be ideolectal – peculiar to individuals, single families, or other small groups of people – or the novel constructions of authors of poetry or other forms of creative or rhetorical speech or writing. It can be readily assumed that all conventional metaphors ultimately derive from the innovative constructs of single men and women. But equally obviously, such verbal inventions are ones that have survived and spread within a larger population, albeit possibly undergoing change with increasing use, and to that extent they are ways of talking about things that are shared and social – which is to say, “conventional.” (The extent to which such metaphors reflect common ways of thinking, about animals, for example, is another matter, which I consider in later chapters.) In prototype theory (e.g., Lakoff 1987), in which a single animal name (e.g., English “rat”) is conventionally applied to humans, the non-animal gloss (e.g., “a despicable person”) can be taken as a peripheral or less central sense of the name’s primary or prototypical meaning (e.g., “a kind of animal”).

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

7

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 8

Thus, in dictionaries one regularly finds metaphorical senses of a term listed after the primary sense. The same would apply, for example, to a word like “father,” which primarily means “male parent” but has secondary (nonprototypical) senses like “Catholic priest” or “founder (e.g., of a nation or academic discipline).” Yet this does not mean that English speakers employing “rat,” for example, to refer to a human being would not usually recognize that the person in question and the small murine creature are quite different sorts of living things or, otherwise expressed, belong to different domains. As far as conventional metaphors are concerned, what applies to English and other European languages applies equally to Nage. Thus, linking humans and particular animals in regularly expressed and culturally standard ways, Nage animal metaphors can be analyzed as employing members of an “animal domain” to talk about members of a “human domain.” These specifications work for Nage because they too distinguish “animals” and “humans” by name – respectively, as ana wa and kita ata (Forth 2016, 52–61). And these named categories correspond closely to “animal” and “human” as ordinarily understood by anglophones, even though, unlike educated anglophones, Nage do not conceive of humans (kita ata) as a subclass of animals (ana wa). As the Nage word for “animal,” ana wa deserves further attention partly because the term itself has metaphorical uses. Besides serving as a higher-order folk taxon encompassing all non-human animals, Nage also apply ana wa to small children. According to their own view, the usage is motivated by the fact that young children lack powers of understanding and communication, making them comparable to non-human creatures. At the same time, ana wa may be doubly metaphoric insofar as ana has as its primary sense “child, immature human,” as revealed in a local interpretation of ana wa as meaning “children (or people) of the wind” (Forth 1989). Nevertheless, besides “child, young person (and young animal),” ana has other senses, including a small version or portion of something and a subordinate or member of a collectivity (as in ana tana, a person who is native to a territory, tana). In fact, it is probably this last sense, rather than “child,” that is relevant to ana wa, “animal,” and moreover to another Nage usage, where ana alone refers to individual animals in relation to the larger kind (as in the question ana apa ke?, “what [kind of] animal is that?”). How wa should be understood is more controversial. Although central Nage sometimes understand it as the word for “wind” (wa, angi wa), other evidence suggests a relation with the homonym wa (wera in other Nage dialects

8

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 9

and central Flores languages), which denotes the malevolent or “wild” spiritual essence of a witch (Forth 1989).1 As the Nage categories “animal” and “human” are not related taxonomically, it follows that any Nage statement identifying the two domains – like describing a person as a urinating dog or a human child as an animal – will be metaphorical. Especially for metaphors in regular use, this is confirmed by the fact that Nage themselves normally recognize their figurative character, that is, as references to subjects (including small children, regardless of how unsocialized they may be) that they would not normally regard as animals – just as an English-speaker describing someone as an “old goat” or a “pig” will ultimately realize that the person in question belongs to the species Homo sapiens and not to a species of the zoological genera Capra or Sus. Speaking of genera and species, it is worth pointing out that with animal metaphors, the animal – the member of the animal domain expressly named in the metaphor – is an entire category of animals. In contrast, the metaphorical referent, the member of the human domain, is typically a person, or occasionally a collection of persons, or at best a social rather than a taxonomic category. The distinction also obtains where metaphors employ a part or particular feature of an animal (as in “a dog’s hind leg” or “a pig’s eye”) since in these instances the item typically pertains to the entire species whereas the referent, particularly if it is human, remains a specific behaviour or attribute – and usually one distinguishing the person referred to from other people in relation to a socially recognized norm. In regard to this “whole-part” relationship, conventional animal metaphors evidently have something in common with animal totemism, whereby people belong to different groups associated with different animals, and which Lévi-Strauss (1963) argued was founded on a structural relation of “metaphor.” This observation applies as much to English and other languages as it does to Nage. Thus, to cite familiar English examples, terms like “lion,” “fox,” or “rat” refer not to features common to all members of the species Homo sapiens but only to some people, and then often only some people some of the time or in the context of particular activities or relationships. However, it is here that the similarity between totemism and conventional animal metaphor ends. Equally important are the differences, a matter I take up in chapters 2 and 8. As demonstrated elsewhere (Forth 2016), the animal (or “folk zoological”) categories Nage employ in their animal metaphors are for the very most part

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

9

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 10

what ethnobiologists call “folk-generics” – units of any folk taxonomy that tend to coincide with the species and genera of international biosystematics. For example, the folk-generic category that Nage name ‘o’a, “monkey,” a component of over thirty Nage metaphors, coincides with the species Macaca fascicularis, the Crab-eating macaque. English examples of folk-generics include “dog,” “cat,” “hawk,” “crow,” “rattlesnake,” and “salmon,” but not “snake” or “fish,” which anglophones would normally understand as names of more inclusive animal kinds. A minority of Nage metaphors employ categories corresponding to “snake” (nipa) and “fish” (ika) – as of course does English (“fish out of water,” “snake in the grass”) – but in the Nage corpus these are very much exceptions that prove the rule. In addition, a few metaphors use “folk-specifics” – categories that form subclasses of folk-generics (e.g., English “sparrowhawk” in relation to “hawk”) – but folk-specifics too occur in only a small number of Nage usages. Although not all folk-generics that compose Nage folk taxonomy bear regular names (Forth 2016, 38–9), all that occur in conventional metaphors naturally do. And it is significant that where Nage employ more inclusive animal categories as metaphors, like the aforementioned “fish” and “snake,” these are the only categories of this type – “life form taxa” in the lexicon of ethnobiology – that are named and, furthermore, are named with single lexemes (words), such as nipa (snake) and ika (fish). This is not to suggest that the possession of a distinct name is the main determinant of the metaphorical use of a given kind of animal. More than other types of animal categories, folk-generics (categories like “monkey,” “dog,” “hawk,” and so on) compose gestalts, components or “chunks” (D’Andrade 1995) of the natural world that present themselves as ineluctable wholes in a universal human perception. And in regard to their overall physical and behavioural homogeneity the same can be argued for snakes and fish, especially by comparison with internally more diverse categories like “mammal” and even “bird.” At the same time, Nage employ particular kinds of snakes in conventional metaphorical expressions (e.g., “python” and “pit viper”) as they also do several sorts of “fish” (e.g., “dolphin” and “Loach goby”). Animal metaphors also occur in Nage naming of human body parts (e.g., the finger tips, called “rhinoceros beetle’s rump”), trees and other plants, spiritual beings, types of buildings, other artefacts, objects, and even other animals – as in “sky dog,” naming both a cricket and a kind of bird. But these are far less common than metaphors applied to humans, which moreover

10

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 11

mostly comprise phrases describing an animal engaged in a certain act or in a particular situation (“a dog pissing at the edge of a path”) rather than simply an unqualified animal name or a phrase describing part of an animal. And while I include instances of these other forms of animal metaphor (in chapters 3 to 7), they are a secondary concern since the majority of Nage animal metaphors do indeed describe humans and human behaviour. As is common among other peoples, Nage use animals’ names as personal names and place names, but as I discuss these in earlier writings (Forth 2004a; Forth 2016), I do not include them here. Also not discussed are metaphorical names of animals that refer, for example, to the human body (e.g., toko ata, “human bone,” a stick insect; lema la, “protruding tongue,” slug) – thus the inverse of animal names applied to human body parts. Nor do I deal exhaustively with binary composites, standard expressions comprising two animal names that refer synecdochically to a larger grouping of animals (Forth 2016, 140–8). Expressions of this sort are listed only when they are further employed as conventional metaphors – for example, when lako wawi (“dog [and] pig”) refers to reproved human behaviours deemed animal-like. English-speakers will be familiar with animal metaphors that employ animal names as verbs, as in “rat on (someone),” “weasel out,” and “snake along” (said of a river or road). Such usages are relatively uncommon in Nage, and in fact I encountered just two possible instances, both involving birds. One is kuku raku, “waterhen,” used to describe people crowding around something by reference to the bird’s remarkable cries (see metaphor No. 417 in chapter 5). The other is kobe koka, “friarbird night” (No. 351), referring to a practice whereby a day is deliberately deleted from a lengthy ritual undertaking. The apparent rarity of such usages, however, appears mostly to be a function of syntactical differences between the two languages, as human behaviours expressed by verbal uses of “rat” and “weasel” in English, for example, are identified by other animal metaphors – as when Nage describe an evasive person, or someone who “weasels” out of things, as possessing “a cat’s waist” (No. 153). Animals also figure in what has been called “visual metaphor,” a notion similar to “icon” in Peirce’s (1930–35) typology (for an anthropological treatment, see Leach 1976, 10, 12). Examples familiar to Westerners include the association of specific animals with yoga positions, popular dances, human sexual positions, and martial arts poses, where the human body is disposed in a way that notionally resembles the form or movement of an animal. Visual

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

11

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 12

metaphors of these sorts are also rare among Nage, although two bird metaphors partly refer to dance movements (Nos. 306 and 414). It may be no coincidence that depictions of animal figures are similarly uncommon in Nage graphic art. The only weaving motif named after an animal is “grasshopper eggs” (No. 496), and while carved figures in wood on buildings and sacrificial posts include horses and domestic fowls, just two conventional motifs, both abstract geometric patterns, are named after animals (the Tokay gecko and the crocodile, Nos. 457 and 489, respectively). Tattooing seems not to have been a traditional practice in Nage (cf. Van Suchtelen 1919–21). Although nowadays one occasionally sees people with tattoos, animal figures are hardly evident among the designs, which usually consist of no more than a cross or the person’s initials. Generally, then, animal symbolism among Nage finds expression for the most part in verbal media, including commonly rehearsed cosmological ideas and traditional narratives as well as conventional metaphors. More on “Metaphor”: Some Analytical Distinctions Both linguists and anthropologists have used “metaphor” in several different ways. For present purposes, a major contrast concerns, on the one hand, “conventional metaphor,” standard expressions encountered in everyday speech and exemplified by English “snake in the grass,” and, on the other, what has been called “conceptual metaphor” (Lakoff and Johnson 1980; Kövecses 2010). Conceptual metaphors are general themes reflected in individual metaphors. These are discernible in all languages and some would appear to be universal. Like the English example just employed, Nage animal metaphors applied to humans manifest the conceptual metaphor “people are animals” (Kövecses 2010, 153, 282, 342), or “humans = animals.” This of course is never explicitly stated by Nage, nor often by anglophones, and, as a conceptual metaphor, it is of course distinct from the scientific identification of Homo sapiens, along with other primates, as members of a more inclusive taxon labelled “animal” (see Forth 2016). Anthropologists may notice that “people are animals” inverts a central proposition of “neo-animism,” part of a recent “ontological turn” (Holbraad and Pedersen 2017), according to which, for members of some small-scale societies at least, “animals are people.” Within this latter framework, moreover, the first proposition might well

12

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 13

be construed as a product of a contrasting ontology known as “naturalism” (sensu Descola 2013) – another issue I rejoin in later chapters. Nage animal metaphors reveal other conceptual metaphors, for example, “having sex = eating (and sex = food),” “male sexual exploits = hunting” (see Nos. 125, 353), and “honesty = straightness” (Nos. 62, 144, 206). These too reveal how connections linguists have uncovered in English metaphors are equally discernible in Nage – a finding of the present study that raises important questions about how far themes identified as conceptual metaphors are culturally specific as opposed to possessing a broader basis in panhuman experience or cognition. Several pairs of terms have been used to distinguish the two parts of a metaphor, in the present case the animal and the non-animal to which an animal metaphor refers. Among the most important are “source” and “target,” developed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980) in the exploration of conceptual metaphor. As the term suggests, “source” defines the domain that supplies concepts and terms used to talk about a “target,” that is, the topic of discourse or the implicit reference of the metaphor – most often human beings in the case of animal metaphors. Linguists thus talk about items from the source domain being “mapped onto” the target domain. “Source” and “target” are also serviceable in analyzing specific conventional metaphors, though in this context the terms admit further distinctions. Thus, where “animal” is the source, the sub-source, as it were, is a specific animal (a dog, rat, or snake), further specified as the “vehicle” of the metaphor. At the same time, “vehicle” can be used, more specifically, to describe a specific animal revealing particular qualities or involved in a specific action – our eponymous “urinating dog” again. Also pertaining to the source domain is what Dirven (1994) calls the “image” or “stereotype” of the entity named in the vehicle. With regard to animal metaphors, these terms describe the knowledge of the empirical animal possessed by a specific ethno-linguistic group. As the Nage corpus reveals, such knowledge derives both from experience of the natural species and, albeit in a far lesser degree, from quite specific utilitarian and symbolic values particular animals have for people. For example, several Nage monkey metaphors reflect the status of monkeys as creatures that do great damage to crops, a component of the animal’s metaphorical image one would not expect to find in European monkey metaphors. But an important qualification is in order for, as the Nage corpus makes clear, it is doubtful whether metaphorical animals possess a single, unitary image since the same animal

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

13

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 14

can appear in multiple metaphors reflecting extremely various attributes of the animal in question and, therefore, quite diverse motivations for individual metaphors.2 With regard to the “target” domain, a further specification, corresponding to the “vehicle” subsumed by a source, is what has been called the “tenor” (Richards 1936). Thus, where the target is human beings, the “tenor” might be a person behaving in a particular way. However, given the rather abstruse appearance of “tenor” in this context, I prefer simply to speak of the referent of a metaphor, meaning its accepted meaning or usual interpretation. On the other hand, I have found “vehicle” useful to retain, in part because its general sense accords with the original Greek sense of “metaphor” as something involving a “transfer” (namely, from the source to the target domain). Normally, the target of a metaphor is more abstract than the source, which is therefore typically less abstract (Kövecses 2010, 7, who employs “life” and “journey” as examples of target and source in English metaphor). A variant view has metaphor talking about less familiar things, the target domain, in terms pertaining to something better known, the source (Lakoff and Johnson 1980, 144, 156). How far these generalizations apply to animals and humans may be debatable, not least because humans might be expected to know themselves rather better than they do non-human animals. Nevertheless, where Nage employ animal behaviours (a dog urinating) to describe human behaviours (someone acting inconstantly or ineffectually), typically the act that is more specific, discrete, and manifest, or “much more concrete and graspable” (Fernandez 1986, 8), does indeed belong to the source domain. As regards metaphors that refer to humans, it is also worth emphasizing that, belonging to the target domain, the referent is not the person to whom a term or expression is applied but some form of human action or behaviour, situation, way of doing things, and so on, which the metaphor – or a socially situated speaker by way of the metaphor – attributes to a specific human subject. Expressed otherwise, while calling someone a urinating dog employs “dog” as the source (or more specifically the vehicle), the target is not the entire person but qualities of certain people that are seen to resemble certain qualities of dogs. As this specification should indicate, metaphor involves not identical qualities equally present in both (animal) source and (human) target but, rather, an asserted similarity. And as has often been argued, rather than passively reflecting pre-existing resemblances, metaphors highlight specific similarities or connections between things that might not otherwise

14

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 15

have been noticed, a property leading some authors to speak of metaphors “creating realities” (Lakoff and Johnson 1980, 156). At the same time, regardless of how one is to understand “creativity” in metaphor (see Black 1993, 35–8), this does not mean that conventional metaphors employing animals are not thoroughly grounded in empirical properties of the creatures concerned, including properties that are available to human perception everywhere. Indeed, as the Nage corpus demonstrates, physical and behavioural features of particular animals, far more than any other factor, inform the motivation of individual metaphors. Motivation rests on specific components of the source domain that are comparable and appropriate to components of the target domain. Features shared by both domains have been called the “grounds” of a metaphor (e.g., Miller 1993, 398; Glucksberg and Keysar 1993, 407; cf. “intermediaries,” Sapir 1977, 6). But what is important for motivation is that these features are recognizable (at least in principle). Metaphors are instances of symbolic thought and action, and in animal metaphors it is of course animals that appear as symbols (or vehicles) for other things. Following a long-standing distinction, “symbols” differ from “signs’ – or at least signs that are not “natural” (Leach 1976) – insofar as signs are based in arbitrary convention. To take an obvious example, as a linguistic sign, the English word “dog” bears no necessary relation to the category denoted, which is just as adequately represented by French chien or Nage lako. In contrast, symbolic relations are in some measure always motivated, which is to say determined or delimited by some property of the symbol, which for conventional metaphors means some property of the vehicle. This is especially clear with animal metaphors, where a quality of the animal is generally accepted as similar to some attribute of the non-animal referent. Thus a person who exhibits notable cunning can be described as a “sly fox” or simply a “fox” (and her or his victims as being “foxed”) by virtue of observable habits of foxes that are comparable to certain human propensities and behaviours, whereas an attribution of cunning or slyness to a pig, horse, or chicken would normally be out of the question. For the moment, I leave out of account whether foxes really are cunning, or cunning in the same ways as are some humans – or, indeed, why attractive women are also called foxes. However, employing this same example, it should be remarked that motivations, like symbolic relations generally, are always partial and selective, so features or aspects of an animal that lend themselves to metaphorical de-

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

15

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 16

ployment tend to be highly specific. Hence someone called a fox would not be expected to have a long bushy tail or to prey on chickens, and a person would not normally be called a fox simply because he or she had red hair or followed an exclusively carnivorous diet, although these are certainly attributes of foxes. Even where resemblances seem obvious, the constituent similarity between animals and humans essential to metaphors is not always a matter of direct, empirically observable continuity. Often the identity is indirect, specifically a function of analogy wherein similarity resides in the relation of an animal to something else and the relation of a person to something else again. Thus, when Nage call people lacking houses of their own “chickens without a coop” (No. 265), they do not allude to any direct resemblance between chickens and humans or even houses and coops; rather, the metaphor reflects the formula “chicken: coop:: human: house” (where the colon means “is to,” and the double colon means “as”). Of course, one might ask: Why do Nage not say “buffalo without a corral” or “monkey without a tree”? Actually, in other metaphors they very nearly do so (see, e.g., “buffalo that wrecks its enclosure,” No. 13), or at any rate they compare the relation of humans and houses with relations between these animals and their characteristic places of habitation. This observation bears on the quite extensive occurrence of synonymity in Nage animal metaphors, where expressions employing different animals have much the same meaning (see chapter 8). But, otherwise, the use of one animal rather than another, although certainly supported by empirical or utilitarian considerations – chicken coops are kept inside or otherwise close to houses – attests to the selectivity of metaphors and, by the same token, to their partial arbitrariness. As will become apparent, Nage animal metaphors often reflect a close and accurate observation of animal forms and habits, and some Nage are notably adept at identifying relations of analogy in their metaphors. But for the moment I wish to stress that motivation in metaphor can be various. In some expressions, only a single animal could fully serve the apparent metaphorical purpose, while in others the selection appears more random. Also, whereas physical properties of particular animals are very often fundamental, in a minority of instances other values, for example an animal’s mythological significance or the specific ways Nage make practical use of an animal – thus cultural factors – are of equal or greater importance. Further qualifying the

16

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 17

generally empirical basis of animal metaphors, in yet other instances the selection of an animal appears to be largely or partly motivated by qualities of the animal’s name. These include names contributing to prosodic effects, where the animal name matches other components of a longer expression by virtue of rhyme, alliteration (repetition of consonants), or assonance (vowel correspondence). Familiar English examples include: “drunk as a skunk” and “loose as a goose” (or “loosey goosey”), exemplifying rhyme; “copycat” and “talk turkey,” revealing alliteration; and “monkey’s uncle,” demonstrating assonance. With other examples – e.g., “pig ignorant,” “loveydovey,” and “eager beaver” – prosodic effects are clearly significant yet have apparently influenced the adjective more than the animal category, which is then motivated instead by observed or attributed features of the creature itself. By contrast, with “loose as a goose” and “copycat” there is no evident basis for the particular selection other than phonological features of the animal’s name. With few exceptions, Nage animal vehicles appear not to be determined entirely by prosodic considerations, and usually some empirical basis can be found for the animal’s selection. Nevertheless, as will be seen, prosodic effects have had a substantial influence on the conventional form of a variety of metaphorical expressions. A final issue concerns the classic contrast of metaphor and simile. Like “metonymy,” “synecdoche,” and other terms, “simile” has often been treated as a variety of a more generally conceived “metaphor.” When distinguished, however, simile denotes expressions where a resemblance between source and target is made explicit (although the nature of the resemblance is usually not specified or defined), as in “like a dog pissing at the edge of a path” or, to cite two English examples, “to eat like a horse” or “fat as a pig.” By contrast, with metaphor the similarity is implicit – as when a fat, greedy, or illmannered person is simply called a “pig.” Exemplifying an intermediate possibility are expressions like “greedy fat pig” and “sly fox,” where a person is identified as an animal but specifically with respect to a single quality indicated by the adjective. The existence of such intermediate and thus ambiguous cases reveals one difficulty with the contrast, and indeed a general finding of this book is that many Nage animal metaphors can be expressed either as a metaphor (where a phrase describing an animal is simply applied to a person) or as a simile (where, by way of terms translatable as “like” or “as,” someone is characterized

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

17

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 18

as resembling an animal). To be sure, some animal metaphors appear to be expressed only as metaphors (e.g., “chickens of god” and “Nage dog,” both discussed in chapter 2) while others are more often expressed as similes and many appear to be used exclusively in this way. However, owing to this variation it is impractical to categorize Nage animals either as strict metaphors or as strict similes, and I have therefore not attempted to do so. As much to the point, Nage themselves do not distinguish “simile” and “metaphor,” categories equally included in pata péle, a Nage concept discussed in the next chapter. Apart from issues of practicality and the absence of a comparable indigenous contrast, the distinction between metaphor and simile can be understood as a matter of degree rather than of kind. Especially when one accepts that conventional references to human beings as animals do not mean they really are animals – a qualification Nage themselves recognize – and hence that metaphors express not an absolute but a partial identity, or a similarity, between humans and animals, then the contrast pertains to how explicitly this similarity (typically an island in a sea of differences) is verbally represented. By the same token, the explicit statement of resemblance definitive of simile hides a difference since someone described as “like a snake,” for example, is in most respects obviously nothing like a snake. At the same time, such a proposition is sufficiently distinguished from a statement like “a falcon is like a hawk” by the fact that falcons and hawks are both types of birds, thus items from the same domain, and moreover by the fact that the resemblance indicated is not only entirely general but is also offered non-figuratively, that is, as a “literal” truth (Ortony 1993, 346– 7; see also the virtually synonymous statement “a falcon is a ‘kind of’ hawk,” which in English, at least, ambiguously implies either close resemblance or class inclusion). Metaphor and simile, therefore, can be treated as points on a “continuum” of explicitness (Sapir 1977, 7–8). In a similar way, simile has been characterized as the “basis of metaphor” (Jones 1948, 105), and metaphor as “abbreviated simile” (Miller 1993, 356). But regardless of whether the encompassing term is taken to be simile (as the latter two authors might suggest) or metaphor (as the continuum model might suggest), the two things can be seen as intrinsically connected. Anyone taking this view is evidently in good company, for it was first proposed by Aristotle in The Poetics. Rather more recently, the position has been challenged by Boyer (1994, 53) on the grounds that metaphor (saying a person “is” a [non-human] animal) and simile (saying that a person “is like” an animal) are cognitively different. By this he means that human thought

18

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 19

processes the two propositions differently, as saying a human is a nonhuman is counterintuitive and arresting in a way that describing a human as resembling a non-human is not. However, this difference is qualified or reduced insofar as the identification of two things entailed in metaphor in a stricter sense (as when a person is simply described as a “snake” or a “hawk”) is never accepted as entirely factual or straightforwardly true. On the other hand, even where likeness is always explicitly articulated, as in the well-known English similes “eating like a horse” and “as free as a bird,” such statements must themselves be taken metaphorically. At best, they are instances of hyperbole, another variety of metaphor, where one degree of something or some quality is substituted for another. Thus while he may eat a lot and quite often, a man who eats like a horse does not really eat as much as a horse or as continuously as a horse, nor does he consume the same food. Similarly, the freedom of someone “as free as a bird” is radically different from a bird’s freedom. Grounded largely in a bird’s ability to fly (an ability humans palpably do not possess), this expression entails an analogy, whereby the bird’s character as a creature that is not earthbound is compared to the circumstances of a person relatively unbound by obligations or restrictions that are not physical but social. These points aside, the fundamental identity of metaphor and simile gains empirical support from Nage animal metaphors, in which humans are often identically linked with the same non-human animal both in explicit statements of resemblance and in expressions in which the similarity is implicit, without this affecting either the meaning or the motivation. In this way, the study of Nage animal metaphors, focusing on actual usage and variation in usage, makes a significant contribution to the study of metaphor in general. In a similar vein, it is worth stressing that many Nage animal metaphors involve metonymy as well as metaphor in the more specific sense. For example, “buffalo mounting a dog” (No. 10), referring to a higher-ranking man who marries or cohabits with a lower-ranking woman, employs the sexual act to describe something larger – the entire conjugal relationship. Similarly, “rat above” (No. 185), referring to something that distracts people’s attention, uses just one of many possible things that might prove distracting to describe any instance or situation of distraction, while in the combination of “quail” and “dove” (see Nos. 393, 402) two categories of birds that do damage to crops are employed to talk about a larger variety of birds that do so, a pattern I have previously described as “dual metonymy.” On the other hand, the use

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

19

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 20

of “buffalo” and “dog” to distinguish people of higher and lower rank involves external analogy (a concept further discussed in chapter 2) and is a straightforward instance of metaphor in the stricter sense. Methods and Methodology All metaphors discussed in this book were recorded during twenty research trips to the Nage region beginning in 1984 and extending to 2018; in total, time spent in the field was approximately three years. Initially I encountered animal metaphors incidentally in the context of general ethnography and learning the Nage language. In the 1990s, however, and partly in connection with investigations of Nage indigenous religion and spiritual cosmology, I developed a more sustained interest in Nage animal symbolism. Later in that decade I also began exploring Nage folk zoology and came to appreciate certain connections, but also important differences, between Nage symbolic representations of animals – in metaphor and elsewhere – and other ways Nage talked and thought about animals. All this contributed to my most recent book (Forth 2016). But while that work cites examples of animal metaphors, as did an earlier monograph on Nage relations with birds (Forth 2004a), it does not treat the topic systematically or comprehensively.3 This is the task of the present work. As the foregoing should suggest, I first encountered animal metaphors in a “naturalistic” way (sensu Hammersley and Atkinson 2007) as a “participant observer.” In contrast, my later initiated study of animal metaphors required far more use of directive questioning. Directive questioning admits degrees. Among the least directive varieties is free-listing, where informants are asked to name instances of a particular item, or a category. Thus, after I had recorded one or more metaphors employing a particular animal (e.g., “dog”), I asked people to list orally all metaphorical expressions they knew that included that animal’s name, an exercise aided considerably by the existence of a Nage term corresponding to English “metaphor” (see chapter 2). Given the reliance of this method on informant recall, it is reasonable to ask how complete the corpus of animal metaphors I employ in this study might be. I do not claim the corpus is absolutely complete. However, free-listing and other questioning about metaphors is likely to produce a more exhaustive return than is exclusive reliance on opportunistic observation of metaphors in use (as methodological “naturalism” would seem to require). And while

20

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 21

there are almost certainly animal metaphors I have missed, the 566 expressions recorded below are very likely to be representative of Nage animal metaphors in general. Once I had established translations of specific metaphors – like “a dog pissing at the edge of a path” – I was able to enquire more directly about their applications. And, of course, once I had become aware of given metaphors – either from observation or questioning – I became more alert to their occurrence in speech and thus in the context of particular activities and social relationships. This frequently gave rise to further questioning and discussion with Nage informants, or “commentators” as I often refer to them below. Questioning was conducted partly in the Indonesian national language (Bahasa Indonesia), a language in which I have been fluent since the mid-1970s in connection with fieldwork on the neighbouring island of Sumba (see, e.g., Forth 1981), and partly in Nage, specifically the dialect spoken in central Nage in which I have become increasingly competent since 1984. Virtually all Nage speak Indonesian, and although fluency varies with age and gender (male and younger Nage generally being more fluent), it would nowadays be difficult to engage in ethnographic conversations without some facility in the national language. Indeed, as is common among bilinguals, Nage often switch between languages in mid-speech, and when asking about named categories or expressions informants would normally first respond by offering Indonesian translations. An ethnographer obviously requires more than translations, and a large part of my effort was directed towards discovering typical Nage uses and understandings of their metaphors, including not only what they referred to but also why users thought a particular animal or animal behaviour was comparable to or provided an appropriate metaphor for something human (e.g., a corresponding human behaviour). In other words, I was searching for Nage views on motivation. Knowledge of local interpretations, including both referents and recognized motivations, was not gained only from explicit questioning or discussions I myself initiated: often, Nage spontaneously proffered explanations of why a particular animal, or an animal acting in a specific way, was appropriate to a specific metaphor, especially after they had gained a better understanding of the purposes of my study. Interpretation and motivation are of course not the same thing. Especially in semiological approaches, where symbolic entities are construed as part of a systematic code, “interpretation” commonly refers to what a symbol means

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

21

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 22

or “stands for,” or what, in regard to Nage animal metaphors, I call the referent. Referents, or interpretations in this sense, can be investigated by eliciting metalinguistic statements, comparable to informant definitions of any word or phrase – for example, “‘bachelor’ means an unmarried man,” which is comparable to “‘rat’ means a despicable person.” At the same time, even where speakers are unable to articulate a referent, these can partly be inferred from observing how metaphors are used – a normal part of any language learning. Motivation, by contrast, concerns features of a metaphor’s specific source or vehicle. In the present study, these would be features of an animal’s form or habits that suit it to the specific, typically human target – or, otherwise expressed, features of the animal that illuminate the metaphor’s meaning. In most cases I found Nage commentators themselves had definite, and moreover completely plausible, ideas about what motivated a particular metaphor. But since my investigation of animal metaphors was part of a larger study of Nage relations with non-human animals, insight into motivation was also available from concomitant investigations of Nage folk zoological knowledge and the value of specific animals in Nage life. Speakers of any language will often be able to identify the meaning of a metaphor without being able to say how or why it “works.” Think, for example, of English metaphors like “eight (or three or ten) sheets to the wind,” describing someone who is extremely drunk. In addition, speakers’ statements about motivation can appear unconvincing, ad hoc, or contrived – as sometimes can local accounts of what metaphors refer to. It goes without saying that, as with any ethnographic topic, it is necessary to discuss metaphors with a variety of people, and the need becomes all the more apparent when informant interpretations appear idiosyncratic or highly personal. For example, one man talking about the metaphor “snake in an orchard,” generally applied to an inactive person or someone who rarely leaves home (chapter 6, No. 422), interpreted this as referring specifically to a person who has been banished to a particular place and who therefore does not associate with other people. As I happened to know beforehand, this man himself had been ostracized by kin and neighbours some years previously, owing to his son having committed incest with his sister (the man’s daughter), and when I spoke to him he was living in a field hut some distance from his village. I would not consider his interpretation as inauthentic; however, it was clearly not the sole interpretation nor was it especially representative.

22

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 23

As even this example may suggest, where native speakers are able to comment on either meaning or motivation, this can contribute significantly to any ethnographic understanding of a metaphor. In fact, even if one had a perfect command of the language, a comprehensive understanding of a community’s metaphors would be impossible without recourse to informants’ statements about both their referents and motivations. Attention to actual usage is important (cf. Victor Turner’s [1967] “operational meaning”), in part because this may reveal inconsistencies with informant exegesis, but – as this last qualification reveals – it is never sufficient in and of itself, a point that gains special force in regard to metaphors reflecting particularly complex or elaborate constructions (see, e.g., No. 417, incorporating the bird named kuku raku, the previously mentioned waterhen). As should be expected, Nage are able to interpret some metaphors better than others. Also not surprisingly, I found people could more readily comment on metaphors used in prosaic speech and applied to distinctive physical or behavioural features of individual people (e.g., expressions comparable to English metaphors like “rat,” “pig,” “snake-in-the grass”) than on animal metaphors contained in proverbs or songs – in other words, in poetic idioms possessing a more diffuse quality and often pertaining to more abstract features of the human condition. Such variation, however, does not merely reflect the nature of the genre, for there is also the possibility of what Turner (1967) called “blocked exegesis,” where people may be unwilling to reveal negative aspects of symbolic usages. Apart from aspects that participants may think reflect badly on the community (Turner’s main illustration), blocked exegesis might also concern, for example, sexual meanings that people might find embarrassing and thus be unwilling to speak about openly. Although the assessment is necessarily subjective, Nage appeared generally far better able to give an account of their animal metaphors than would many English-speakers, and this was most notable when discussing motivations. Whereas Nage are usually able to give a cogent account of specific animal features that inform particular metaphors, it is unlikely that many modern English speakers would be able, for example, to say what features of weasels fit usages like “weasel word” or “to weasel out”; to provide an analysis of usages like “catbird seat” and “brass monkey”; or even to give an articulate account of why someone might be called a “pig.” The apparent difference is most readily explained by the unfamiliarity of most modern and especially

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

23

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 24

urban anglophones with animals and animal behaviour, both domestic and wild. But regardless of informant capabilities it should not be supposed that local accounts fully explain the metaphors. For one thing, they do not reveal how, in some instances, the same animal metaphor has become associated with two or more quite different local interpretations. Therefore, even where informants are able to provide substantial accounts of factors illuminating the motivation of metaphors, it is always necessary to observe metaphors in use and to draw on wider ethnographic knowledge that may support, qualify, or contradict such accounts. And even then, one cannot of course claim to have attained perfect knowledge of a metaphor. In an essay published over forty years ago, Sperber (1975, 33–4, 48, 63) argued that, unlike words in natural languages, “symbols,” under which he included conventional metaphor, do not have “meaning” and that interpretations of symbols – by which he mostly meant their “translations” or referents – are not true interpretations but are themselves symbolic statements and so only extend the symbolism. In the same context he similarly described motivations of symbols as part of the symbolism they seem to explain and, therefore, as symbolic rather than “meta-symbolic” (33). However, in contrast to other symbols (like material objects or ritual actions), which often are not locally interpreted, conventional metaphors are components of natural languages and so are in many respects similar to single words and standard idioms. Thus it is not surprising that, just as speakers of a language are usually able to provide a gloss of a word for “dog,” say, so Nage are usually able to say what “a dog pissing at the edge of a path” refers to and are, furthermore, very often able to comment on the similarity between the canine behaviour and comparable human behaviours they see as motivating the metaphor. Things are quite different, for example, with decorated sacrificial posts or acts performed at such posts – both components of major Nage ritual performances – which obviously cannot be glossed or paraphrased as can words, and whose “meanings” Nage usually find difficult or impossible to articulate. Even if interpretations of symbols of all sorts (including informant statements about motivation) were only to extend the symbolism as Sperber claims, investigating these would still form an essential part of their study, a point that has special relevance for conventional metaphor. And in fact, as I have discovered from investigating how Nage themselves understand their animal metaphors, conventional metaphors appear to differ quite substan-

24

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 25

tially from other forms of symbolism employing animals (a matter I consider in greater detail in later chapters). Organization Chapter 2 explores an indigenous Nage concept of metaphor and locates conventional metaphors in relation to anthropological uses of “metaphor” regularly encountered in the analysis of animal symbolism, especially since the mid-twentieth century. In the succeeding five chapters I then discuss in turn each of the individual expressions that compose the Nage corpus. Chapter 3 deals with domestic mammals, chapter 4 with wild mammals, chapter 5 with birds, chapter 6 with other non-mammals, and chapter 7 with insects and other invertebrates. Some readers may question an ordering of a non-Western society’s animal metaphors according to phylogenetic categories employed in international (or scientific) zoology. I do so for three reasons. First, Nage themselves possess folk-taxa, specifically “life forms” (sensu Berlin 1992), that generally correspond to “mammal,” “bird,” “snake,” and “fish” (Forth 2016) and thus reasonably approximate the “classes” (e.g., Mammalia, Aves) and other taxa of biological systematics. Second, the procedure replicates that followed in my 2016 book and so facilitates coordination with this earlier work. And third, ordering animal metaphors with reference to an internationally recognized scheme of animal taxa best facilitates cross-cultural comparison. In all chapters, single animals are identified with an English name (e.g., “dog”), the Nage name, and a Latinate taxon (or “scientific name”). Under each animal name, individual metaphors are then arranged alphabetically in accordance with their English translations. The metaphors are first given in English translation, followed by the original Nage expression, and then by a brief summary of the recognized referent or referents. After this I include a commentary, expanding on the translation and discussing how the metaphor is employed, details of its motivation, and further matters that illuminate the Nage usage. In treating issues of translation, I sometimes refer to languages closely related to Nage, especially other languages in the “Ngadha-Lio” group (Wurm and Hattori 1981), such as Endenese and Lio (spoken to the east of Nage) and Ngadha (spoken immediately to the west). Also mentioned in the commentaries are comparisons with conventional metaphors found in

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

25

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 26

English, Indonesian, and other languages, including other eastern Indonesian languages. As explained, discussion of motivation draws in large part from informant exegesis, and where my analysis, based on observation of usage, more general ethnography pertaining to Nage practice and knowledge of particular animals, or information drawn from international zoology replaces, augments, or qualifies local exegesis, this is made clear. As noted, animal metaphor is found not only in expressions referring to people but also in the names of human body parts, plants, artefacts, other animals, and so on. Where these occur, such expressions are listed at the end of individual animal entries (e.g., “dog,” “rat,” “crow,” “viper”), thus after the majority of metaphors that refer to human actions, characters, and the like (and thus qualifying the otherwise alphabetical ordering of entries). In each case, I begin with metaphorical animal names (e.g., “buffalo cricket” denoting a large kind of cricket), thereafter listing plant names and then names of artefacts and objects. Including informant exegeses, commentaries are provided in the same way as for other metaphorical usages, and where possible I provide scientific (Latinate) identifications for the plant or animal referents. To facilitate cross-referencing, metaphors are numbered consecutively throughout chapters 3 to 7. Drawing on discussion of individual usages in the preceding five chapters, chapter 8 explores general features of Nage animal metaphors, including the extent to which their motivation is attributable to observation and empirical knowledge of physical features and behaviours of given species, as opposed to human uses served by an animal or an animal’s symbolic value in myth, cosmology, and so on, or lexical features of animal names. This discussion produces an important result for it reveals how the metaphorical use of animal categories in fact has little connection with other “symbolic” uses of the same categories and also less than might be expected with the animals’ utilitarian value. Another comparative issue explored in chapter 8 concerns variation in the metaphorical use made of different animal life forms (mammals, birds, and so on). As will be seen, in regard to the number of metaphors employing each animal category – mostly folk-generics like “cat,” “crocodile,” “crow,” and “cockroach” – Nage make more use of mammals than they do of any other kind of animal, even though the number of individual bird and invertebrate categories employed metaphorically is considerably larger. They also make far more use of domestic than of wild mammals. And in these respects, Nage use of animals as metaphors corresponds in some interesting

26

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 27

ways with what is found in English usage – a finding that, as I show, ultimately contributes to understanding the prominence of animals in general as vehicles of conventional metaphor. The final chapter, chapter 9, then turns to questions of what Nage metaphors reveal about their relations with non-human animals; how animal metaphors may reflect Nage ideas about and expectations of fellow humans; and, in a closely related vein, how the metaphors express social values in regard to varieties of human character and behaviour, and, thus, the place of animal metaphor in social intercourse and social relationships. Finally, this chapter deals with matters of comparative ontology by addressing the question of whether or how far Nage animal metaphors provide evidence for a distinct way of thinking about continuities and discontinuities between humans and non-human animals, and, particularly, how far Nage might, in this respect, depart from the ontological “naturalism” some anthropologists have proposed as the definitive feature of Western thought.

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

27

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 28

2 Metaphors and “Metaphor” in Human-Animal Relations

For some anthropologists “metaphor” has become almost a dirty word. In particular, participants in the previously mentioned “ontological turn,” including proponents of a “neo-animism” (a coinage of Graham Harvey 2006), regard statements by members of non-Western societies identifying humans and non-human entities not as metaphor but as literal beliefs, and perhaps even experiences, definitive of a distinct ontology, a way not only of thinking but of “being.” Exemplifying this position is Ingold’s criticism of analyses of hunter-gatherer peoples who speak of their relation with their environment in terms of a relationship between “parent” (the environment) and “child” (the people). Whereas others (e.g., Bird-David 1999) have interpreted such expressions as metaphors that use social relations to “make sense of,” conceptualize, model, or construct human experience of nature (a position recently defended by Descola 2013, 250–1), Ingold asserts that they are no such thing. Rather, reference to the forest, for example, as a bountiful parent reveals not a metaphor but an “actuality,” “a moment in the unfolding of relations between humans and non-human agencies and entities in the environment” (Ingold 2011, 45). And in verbally speaking of their environment as “parents” and “beg[ging] the forest to provide food as would a human parent,” Ingold further claims, food-collectors are simply giving voice to an identity between human relations with (and within) nature and relations within (or with) society, and are, by the same token, expressing their “real unity” (50, emphasis added) – a formulation facilitating Ingold’s attempt to dissolve the dualism of “nature” and “society” (or “culture”).

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 29

In another place, Ingold (2011, 50) suggests that, in these instances, “the metaphor ‘forest is as [sic] parent’ could just as well be expressed as ‘parent is as [sic] forest,’” adding that the “force of the metaphor is to reveal the underlying ontological equivalence of human and non-human components of the environment as agencies of nurturance.” At least as far as conventional metaphor goes, this is questionable for metaphors are characteristically asymmetrical – so that describing a person as an animal does not mean the animal can equally be called a “person” or that it is ever conceptualized as such. Although Ingold’s claim would suggest that he does subscribe to some application of “metaphor” (129, 283, 284, 285, 361), his otherwise censorious approach to anthropological employment of the concept refers specifically or primarily to hunter-gatherers and, on that ground alone, might be considered irrelevant, or less relevant, to cultivators like the Nage (even though they hunt as well). On the other hand, Ingold’s approach generally suggests a more inclusive relevance (see, e.g., his critique of Gudeman’s [1986] interpretation of Western and non-Western “models of livelihood” [Ingold 2011, 44–5], where “model” appears largely equivalent to “metaphor”) and even a view that, in their allegedly non-metaphoric way of thinking, hunter-gatherers have got things right (see, e.g., Ingold 2011, 76; also Ingold 2016, 308). To generalize on this kind of ontological pluralism (Holbraad and Pedersen 2017, 156), metaphor is treated by proponents as an artefact of what has been called “naturalism” (sensu Descola 2013), a mode of thinking about and experiencing the world represented as exclusively characteristic of Western societies and principally contrasted to a revamped notion of “animism.” Especially as I am not arguing that Nage animal metaphors, or metaphors of any sort, demarcate or typify an entire cosmology or pervasive ontology, I am not entirely unsympathetic to Ingold’s argument. I would also question the social determinism or constructivism against which he speaks and would do so, moreover, not just with reference to hunter-gatherer cosmology but also in respect to human thought and behaviour in general. However, since my topic is conventional metaphor, standard forms of verbal expression, it is unclear how far we are talking about the same thing. In several respects, Ingold’s attack appears to be directed primarily at “metaphor” as employed as an analytic, interpretative, or observer’s category – or what has sometimes been called “unconscious” metaphor (Sandor 1986, 112) or “literal metaphors” (West 2007, 63, 83, citing Cochetti 1995) and which, as I explain below, can

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

29

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 30

also be distinguished as “Jakobsonian” metaphor. On the other hand, in questioning whether a hunter-gatherer practice of addressing a forest as a parent can be considered “metaphorical,” Ingold (2011, 44) asserts that “this is evidently not an interpretation that the people would make themselves” – as if to suggest that something can be called metaphor only insofar as its users recognize it as such. Interestingly, another ontological pluralist who takes exception to anthropological deployments of metaphor, Viveiros de Castro (2004, 13–16), makes virtually the same assertion when, in reference to Urban’s (1996) interpretation of indigenous South American ideas concerning jaguars and tapirs as “metaphoric,” he states that he (Viveiros de Castro) “could hazard a guess” that the people themselves “probably do not share this interpretation” (Viveiros de Castro 2004, 14). One might enquire why neither of these authors, or the writers they cite, apparently ever asked the people themselves. But in any case, and despite Ingold’s use of “evidently,” no specific evidence is provided for either of these claims. The more important point, however – and one I need to stress – is that, in regard to their conventional animal metaphors, Nage do indeed advance such interpretations. That is, when they describe somebody as a “dog,” or “like a dog,” they are explicitly not saying that the person really is a dog. In other words, they describe such verbally articulated relations between a human and a non-human animal as expressly metaphorical. And they are able to do so by invoking a named concept corresponding to European “metaphor.” “Metaphor” in Nage All of the usages I discuss in this book are instances of the Nage category pata péle, a term people equate with Indonesian ibarat, “simile, metaphor,” and which Nage with a better knowledge of the national language recognize as synonymous with Dutch-derived metafora (“metaphor”). Sometimes Nage describe their conventional metaphors as bholo ‘ana, “just talk, only (a way of) speaking,” an evaluation signalling recognition of the fact that a person described as an animal, say, is ultimately not an animal (ana wa) but a human being (kita ata). However, bholo ‘ana applies not only to speech recognized as figurative but equally to non-figurative statements that are not backed by evidence or that pertain to future actions that have yet to be carried out. Hence the more exact designation of statements that are distinguishably metaphorical remains pata péle.

30

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 31

Pata péle comprises the nominal term pata, modified by péle (adjectives always follow nouns in Nage). In contrast to words referring to language or speech in general (e.g., punu, “to speak, state”; sa punu, “way of talking, language”; and ‘ana, dialectal rana, “to state, tell, relate”), pata denotes a specific statement, either one that has already been made or one that will be made. Tau pata (tau, “to do, make”) thus means “to create, compose” lyrics or a speech or, less formally “to make a statement.” The term further refers to a form of words in regular use – for example, an expression regularly employed in formal ritual language or standard phrases used in orations. Apart from these uses, other recorded senses of pata include “(spoken) decision, agreement, or understanding”; a “quotation (a record of what someone has said),” an express “opinion” (contrasting to ola he, a thought yet to be openly expressed) or “position (on a matter)”; “information,” “report” or “(piece of) news” (as in edi pata, “to bring news, convey information,” and pata mona dhu ena, “word has not reached there”), and a “matter, topic of conversation.” As a reference to fixed expressions, pata is a component of several terms mostly specifying contexts in which the former are typically employed. These include: pata teke, lyrics of chants that accompany circle-dancing (teke); pata joki, planting songs; pata kasi, songs of mourning; and pata dhéro, songs performed while circle-dancing during annual pugilistic competitions named etu (Forth 1998). Another compound of pata denoting lyrics is pata néke, or, more completely, pata péle néke (also péle néke), which refers not to the context of a performance but to content. Meaning “to tease, deride, criticize (often in a cynical way),” néke as a modifier of pata describes lyrics of a variety of songs performed while planting and circle-dancing that are sung, in turn, by groups of men and women and that tease or deride members of the opposite sex. (The reciprocal character of these exchanges is emphasized in the related term papa néke, where papa expresses reciprocal action.) Such teasing or derision – which English term is the better translation varies with context – is very often of a sexual nature, and the human traits to which the phrases refer are typically oblique. As this should suggest, the language of pata néke, as of other performances classified as pata (planting songs, songs of mourning), is characteristically metaphorical, and a great many component phrases comprise animal metaphors. It therefore follows that statements (pata) contained in planting songs (pata joki), for example, equally comprise instances of pata péle, or metaphor. At the same time, Nage employ many more animal metaphors in everyday speech than they do in song.

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

31

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 32

As the qualifier of pata and therefore as a term specifying metaphorical language, péle has several related meanings, all involving the idea of separation and, more specifically, of placing a seal or partition between things. Among these are “to close or shut off, enclose” and “to keep something away (from something else),” as in péle bhada, “to shut a buffalo in” a corral or other confined area, and péle manu “to place a chicken inside a coop or cage” or, alternatively, “to keep chickens out” (of a garden, for example). Péle ae can mean “to close off or hold back a flow of water (ae),” as is done when constructing a dam or weir across a stream or river, while pe ngawu awu (where pe is a synonymous abbreviation of péle) describes a wooden or bamboo retainer used to hold earth in place at the lower edge of a sloping garden plot in order to prevent slippage or erosion. Similarly, péle zala (or pe zala) means “to block off ” a path or road (zala), usually by erecting a bamboo barricade. In other cases in which the sense of sealing or shutting off is equally present, péle has the additional sense of “protecting” something – as in péle (ko) angi, “to shut out wind,” “protect from the wind,” a function served by walls or vertical screens in a house or hut, or any sort of “windbreak.” More figuratively, the last phrase can mean to keep out or protect a place from various sorts of negative forces, either human or spiritual, while in much the same way péle ngai (ngai is “breath”) refers to thwarting another person’s efforts. In a more tangible vein, comparable usages include péle (ae) uza, “to keep out rain,” describing the function of dried palm boughs placed atop maize storage frames or a large banana leaf held above the head, and péle leza, “to keep out the sun,” describing a parasol or modern sunglasses. In other contexts – and often in the abbreviated form pe – péle refers more specifically to covering up or screening off in order to hide or conceal something. One example is pe ngia, “to hide the face,” an expression combined in parallelistic speech with nidi pasu, “to conceal the cheeks,” to form a standard expression referring to a quantity of goods, additional to the bridewealth, paid to a woman’s group in order to facilitate an illicit or undesirable marriage (e.g., where the relation between the two spouses is considered too close). The phrases imply that the payment serves as a screen between the two sides to a marriage – one might even say it creates the sides or creates a division, especially where a marriage might be conceived as occurring within a single group. Conceived as an act of separation (péle or pe), the payment can alternatively be interpreted as putting a distance between the spouses as

32

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 33

well as concealing the problematic aspects of their relationship. And a notion of protection is equally present insofar as less than correct marriages, like other improper acts or relationships that are not ritually neutralized, can result in illness, affliction, or other misfortune for the parties concerned. As should be clear from the foregoing, as the term for “metaphor,” pata péle can be understood as referring to a statement that separates, closes off, hides, or protects one thing from another – or, indeed, incorporates two or more of these meanings at the same time. As to what may be separated from what, an immediate inference is that this is an implicit, non-metaphorical statement reflecting the speaker’s intention and the referent (or interpretation) of the metaphor. And, in fact, Nage with whom I discussed this question agreed. As one man put it, what is péle (screened off, shut out, covered, or concealed) by metaphorical language is the speaker’s “true statement” (expressed in Indonesian as kata sebenarnya, “true or proper words”) or what cannot, or should not, “be expressed directly” (di omong langsung). Thus, to use the informant’s own example, instead of “directly” describing someone as possessing an “ugly, bad, or wicked character” (ngai zede ta’a ‘é’e) one might describe the person as being or behaving like a “dog (and) pig” (lako wawi, No. 86). If these statements have a familiar ring, this is probably because “direct” (Indonesian langsung) is often encountered as a synonym of “literal” or “non-figurative” in English writing on metaphor (e.g., Sandor 1986). Like the last example, the majority of animal metaphors Nage apply to people are negative or critical in tone, a fact that bears on their place in social intercourse and relationships (see chapter 9). Especially where metaphors convey a less than positive evaluation, metaphor in the Nage view renders socially more acceptable what otherwise would be less acceptable by “screening off ” or “covering” the speaker’s “true meaning” (as in the informant’s interpretation reported above). But this “screen” is further construed as “protecting” and “preserving” (two further senses of péle) the feelings of people referred to or addressed and, therefore, the relationship between speakers and human referents – another assessment of animal metaphors Nage themselves recognize. Both interpretations might initially appear paradoxical because the “true meaning” of metaphors is normally known both to the speaker and to the person spoken about or addressed – an open secret, one might say. Yet it hardly needs mentioning that, among humans generally (and perhaps more so among Indonesians than among Westerners), the way something is said can be more important than what is expressed, and speaking of something openly

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

33

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 34

can have quite different consequences from conveying a message by more covert, or “covered,” means. Of course, whether expressing a value pertaining to indirectness or focusing more specifically on protecting human sensibilities, local interpretations of pata péle are less applicable where animal metaphors refer to positively valued human traits. They also have no relevance for metaphors that serve as the sole names of plants, artefacts, or other animals. Indeed, regardless of their referents, Nage metaphors, like metaphor anywhere, cannot simply be a matter of employing a figurative expression where a direct or literal statement could have been used instead. For literal equivalents are not always available, and Nage use animal metaphors in conveying a variety of quite specific ideas, mostly about humans and human behaviour and character that cannot be so fully conveyed, or communicated so subtly or artfully, by other means. Ideas of separating, shutting off, sheltering, and concealing that are central to the Nage concept are also discernible in terms for “metaphor” in other eastern Indonesian languages. This holds not only for Ngadha and Lio, eponymous languages of the Ngadha-Lio group spoken, respectively, to the west and east of Nage and which contain terms virtually identical to Nage péle and pata péle,1 but also for Sikkanese, a member of the separate FloresLembata group of languages spoken in the far eastern part of Flores. Pareira and Lewis (1998) list Sikkanese patang-péleng or péleng-patang, expressions obviously comparable to Nage (or Ngadha-Lio) pata péle, as “proverb” (Indonesian peribahasa). They also gloss péle as “to go against” (Indonesian menyongsong; as in “to sail against the wind’), thereby suggesting the idea of something acting as a counterforce, like a dam or barricade. Immediately recalling two Nage usages described above, a similarly close correspondence is found in Kambera, spoken in the eastern part of the neighbouring island of Sumba, where kajangu, a word whose primary meaning is something used to cover and protect oneself from rain or sun – a large banana leaf or palm bough, for example – additionally refers to the pervasively metaphoric lexicon of Sumbanese ritual language, which, as I note in an earlier work, serves to “shelter or disguise that to which [speakers] obliquely refer” (Forth 1981, 19). In the same vein, Onvlee (1984, 136) glosses tamu kajangu, a name (tamu) used in place of the real name of a person of high rank, with Dutch beschuttingsnaam, which incorporates beschutten, “to shelter, screen” (from schut, “screen, fence, partition”), and is therefore semantically identical to German

34

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 35

Deckname (literally “cover name”), meaning “alias.” Of course, an alias or alternative name is not quite the same thing as a metaphor. Yet insofar as both involve substituting one term or phrase with another, it is not without interest that terms with the same meaning in Germanic languages should involve the same metaphor – of covering, shutting off, or sheltering something – as do terms for “metaphor” in languages of eastern Indonesia. In a way also comparable to eastern Indonesian representations of metaphor, the Ilongot people of the Philippines, speakers of another MalayoPolynesian language, characterize the metaphoric speech of adult men’s oratory as “crooked” speech, contrasting to the “straight” speech of ordinary discourse (Rosaldo 1980, 194, 199, 202). Here, too, metaphor is distinguished from literal language by “indirection” (198–9), a property obviously shared by Nage pata péle, or “speech that separates, covers, or hides.” And equally noteworthy is Rosaldo’s interpretation of Ilongot oratory as using metaphors to “hide … deeper meanings” (202). Much further afield, another view of metaphor comparable to that suggested by the Nage term is discernible among the Amerindian Cuna of Panama. Specifically, the Cuna idea of metaphor finds expression in forms of purpa (“soul, shadow”), including purpale, a word partly meaning “covertly, invisibly, incorporeally,” while purpar sunmakke, “to speak metaphorically,” more generally refers to “speaking in euphemisms or other indirect speech forms” (Howe 1977, 137). As Howe goes on to note, both metaphor and euphemism “share the quality of being hidden, at one remove.” He further suggests that, as a reference to metaphors, the best gloss of purpale may be “the hidden essence of things” (137), and later he speaks of “the secret or hidden quality of metaphor” (163). If this is correct, then the Cuna word would seem to refer to the meaning of a metaphor (the interpretation or referent), whereas Nage péle, understood as something that separates, closes off, or hides, applies more to the vehicle. Nevertheless, as Howe makes clear, for Cuna the process of metaphor involves an act of covering or concealing (and, by way of interpretation, eventually uncovering or revealing) just as it does for Nage. How widespread representations similar to the Nage concept might be either in the Malayo-Polynesian-speaking world or within a broader range of languages and societies, I am unable to say. But in a comparative frame, equally important is the contrast between the Nage (and Sumbanese, Ilongot, and Cuna) view of metaphor and European “metaphor,” at least if one is to judge from the meaning of Greek metapheiren, as a “transfer” or “carrying over” –

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

35

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 36

as in the transferring of an idea pertaining to an animal to a human subject. Clearly, metaphor as “transfer” involves the image of connecting things. By contrast, metaphor as expressed in pata péle conveys quite the opposite meaning, of something that disconnects – or forms a barrier rather than a bridge. But this does not mean that Nage do not also recognize metaphors as ways of effectively articulating thoughts and feelings, anymore than it means that anglophones, for example, do not appreciate the indirectness and opacity of metaphor – the fact that rather than describing humans directly and explicitly in strictly human terms, one speaks instead of animals, plants, or something else not human. Indeed, the European and Nage concepts both turn on division and difference: in the first case between two domains (source and target) and in the second between something that separates, covers, or conceals (the metaphorical statement) and something that is separated and covered (the implicit referent). Of course, in the Nage conception this referent is only partly “covered” since, for those who know the metaphor, the meaning is transparent. And in a parallel way, the “transfer” a metaphor effects between two domains is less than complete for, in the process, the message received is always partly transformed – even though the meaning extracted from the source necessarily retains some resemblance to the meaning assumed in the target domain. (Think, for example, of what changes and remains the same when we speak of the “flow” of a river and the “flow” of speech.) However, one should not make too much of the words in which concepts of “metaphor” are expressed, for both European “metaphor” (or Latin metaphora, from Greek metapheiren) and Nage pata péle must themselves be understood as figurative usages – if not as metaphors in the stricter sense, then as metonymies in which different parts refer to the same whole. In so doing, moreover, they focus on different modalities of the same complex phenomenon, and, to that extent, analyzing them comparatively illuminates two contrary yet ultimately complementary properties of a single thing.2 “Metaphor” and Conventional Metaphor As confirmed by their own understanding, it should be quite clear that Nage pata péle specifically denotes conventional metaphors: standard verbal expressions that describe something human, say, by talking about something nonhuman. For a considerable time, however, anthropologists have additionally

36

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 37

employed “metaphor” as an analytical category in the investigations of relations, including relations between humans and animals, which are not expressed, or are not expressed solely or primarily, in conventional metaphors. Deriving from the work of Jakobson, this other use of “metaphor” specifies one of two major forms of symbolic or semiotic relations (the other, of course, being identified with metonymy). In regard to relations that are not semantic or even linguistic, a well-known application of this contrast is Jakobson’s interpretation, later taken up by Leach (1976), of Frazer’s homeopathic and contagious magic – acts that frequently lack any verbal component – as founded on metaphor and metonymy, respectively (Jakobson and Halle 1956, 95). Understood in this way, “metaphor” became a mainstay of structuralism, and in anthropology came to be employed in the interpretation of relations discernible not only in ritual and myth but also, for example, in forms of social organization, including systems of kinship and marriage (e.g., Wagner 1986). In fact, so popular has been this extended acceptation of metaphor that it has survived into the twenty-first century, thus well past the heyday of structuralism and even poststructuralism. Especially in regard to the distinction with conventional metaphor, it is worth stressing that, while “metaphor” in the Jakobsonian sense is sometimes identifiable in what members of a cultural community commonly say (e.g., when members of a a turtle clan describe themselves as turtles), such verbal expression is neither exclusive nor necessary. That is, a relation between things thus identifiable as “metaphor” might be discerned as an aspect of those things of which culture participants are, or quite likely will be, unaware, so that their determination will be mainly or entirely the product of an extraneous interpretation. Among the best known instances of such anthropological deployment of “metaphor,” and one with special relevance for human relations with animals and other living things, is Lévi-Strauss’s (1963) interpretation of totemism as involving a relation of metaphor connecting a series of human groups comprising a single social system and a series of natural species. For Lévi-Strauss, it will be recalled, this relation defines the fundamental structure of totemic systems, and any substantial connections participants posit between themselves and their totem species – for example, an identification of the species as ancestors or as sharing common descent with humans – are secondary, contingent, and inessential. In the same way, similarities of behaviour or physical form posited between a totem animal and human members of a totemic group are not primary but derivative.

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

37

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 38

Obviously, “metaphor” as applied to conventional Nage expressions employing animals and “metaphor” as applied to totemism both entail regularly expressed conceptual connections between animals and humans. This would suggest a fundamental resemblance, but in other respects the two instances of “metaphor” are quite different. A difference already touched on lies in the fact that metaphors like “a dog pissing at the edge of a path” are recognized by Nage themselves as figurative usages, that is, as not entailing any idea that a person so described really is a dog or has temporarily become a dog – nor, indeed, that the human referent is actually urinating. By contrast, the structural relation of totemism as articulated by Lévi-Strauss is metaphoric specifically for the analyst, even though the component associations between human groups and animals are phenomena with which members will naturally be familiar. In addition, members of a “dog clan,” for example, may claim a substantial connection with canines. In what sense humans actually identify with their totemic species is a topic of considerable dispute in anthropology (compare, e.g., Lévi-Strauss’s view with that of ontological pluralists like Descola 2013). But it is fair to say that members of totemic groups would not usually regard their identification with a totem animal as “merely a way of speaking” (Nage bholo ‘ana) – nor, as this would imply, as something that could be more exactly verbalized in a quite different way. (Even though it would hardly matter for an understanding of Nage conventional metaphors, it is also worth mentioning that, with one possible exception, what can be called “totems” among Nage comprise not animals but plants [Forth 2009a; Forth 2016, 260].) Focusing on the Nage corpus, conventional metaphors and “metaphor” as employed in structuralist analysis can be seen to differ in at least four other respects. First, Nage recognition of the figurative character of conventional metaphors is consistent with their alternative expression, in many cases, either as similes (“like a dog …”) or as metaphors in the stricter sense. Second, whereas in totemism an animal, or sometimes two or more animals, is exclusively related to a single group or category of people, with conventional animal metaphors all animals are, with relatively few exceptions (such as when an expression can only be applied either to women or men), prospectively identified with anyone. Thus, in principle, any Nage can be described, for example, as “a urinating dog,” “a chicken with feathered legs,” or a “dolphin down by the coast.” Third, and following from the foregoing, the connection between humans and animals in totemism is permanent, so

38

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 39

that a member of a dog clan, say, is always a dog. By contrast, someone whose work is inconstant, and who is therefore characterized as “a dog pissing at the edge of a path,” may only very occasionally behave in this way and, furthermore, only in the estimation of one or more specific others – based, perhaps, on how the person’s behaviour affects them. To take another example, “bees inside a cavity” (No. 512) describes several people speaking simultaneously or in such a way that individual voices cannot be distinguished and whose conversation is likely to bother other people. But the individuals thus characterized do not of course always converse in this way. In other words, Nage metaphors refer largely to individuals or collections of individuals rather than to whole categories of people, and they are more often used situationally rather than categorically as references to constant human characters. (These specifications, I suspect, probably apply to animal metaphors in most languages.) A fourth distinction is also related to the first two. As will become clear from chapter 8, many animal metaphors in the Nage corpus are synonymous with others or nearly so. That is, the same or very similar human attributes are described with metaphors employing quite different animals. With totemism, by contrast, the association of a social group or category is, again, fixed by tradition, and while it is possible for groups to possess more than one totem simultaneously, there can be no substitution of one animal for another. Here, one may be reminded of Sperber’s (1975) point that, by contrast to components of natural language (words, phrases), symbols cannot be “translated” by other symbols. However, in this respect synonymous conventional metaphors, as standard expressions with well-defined meanings, tend to resemble non-figurative linguistic usages and, to that extent, differ from other forms of symbolism. In exploring relations between humans and other living things, and using the concept in an extended and at least partly Jakobsonian sense, anthropologists have of course applied metaphor to far more than totemism. A noteworthy example from eastern Indonesia is Fox’s (1971) article “Sister’s Child as Plant,” in which a pervasive analogy with plant growth and cultivation is shown to govern Rotinese conceptions of kinship. But many other instances concern not plants but animals, as, for example, Tambiah’s (1969) nearly contemporaneous 1969 article in which he distinguishes “metaphorical” and “metonymical” forms of human-animal relations among the non-totemic Thai. And another instance is Valeri’s (2000) more recent discussion of taboo

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

39

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 40

among the eastern Indonesian Huaulu, in which he distinguishes human relations with dogs and chickens, respectively, in the same way. Although employing “metaphor” almost entirely as a reference to figurative language, worthy of special attention in connection with the expressive deployment of animal categories is Evans-Pritchard’s work on the Nuer, not least because it represents a landmark development in the anthropological study of relations between humans and animals that is both earlier and quite distinct from Lévi-Straussian structuralist approaches. A well-known example is Evans-Pritchard’s (1956, 88) interpretation of the Nuer statement “twins are birds,” which he identifies as a “belief ” (80) although later as a “symbol” – and, ultimately, a symbol of the special relation of twins to god (131–2). This double characterization may seem inconsistent insofar as “beliefs” and “symbols” are usually contrasted as propositions held to be literally true and not literally true. Similarly ambiguous is Evans-Pritchard’s use of “metaphor,” for example when he asserts that the Nuer statement that twins and birds are kin “may be regarded as metaphorical” but not the relationship between twins and birds per se. Or when he speaks of an “implicit metaphor which runs throughout Nuer religion of light and dark, associated with sky and earth” (97, emphasis added) while otherwise reserving “metaphor” for figurative language, which is to say, conventional metaphor. Nevertheless, in its symbolic aspect, EvansPritchard further analyzes the Nuer equation of twins and birds as one based in an analogy, whereby twins are considered related to god in a way similar to birds – thus much in the same way as Crocker (1977a) interpreted the “metaphor” he (Crocker) detected in the Bororo identification of men and parrots. And also recalling the Bororo relation, the Nuer identification of twins and birds is not only verbalized but finds further expression in ritual, for example when a dead infant twin is not buried like other infants but instead is placed in the fork of a tree (Evans Pritchard 1956, 129–30). Insofar as Nuer ideas about twins and birds might therefore be construed as entailing metaphor (or, alternatively, “metonymy” [see Turner 1991]), then so might the relation between Nuer and cattle or, more specifically, Nuer men and oxen (Evans-Pritchard 1940; Evans-Pritchard 1956). In this case too, “metaphor” – a word that appears nowhere in Evans-Pritchard’s 1940 monograph – is not a usage of the ethnographer himself. However, subsequent commentators have interpreted the relation as metaphoric (e.g., Crocker 1977b, 61–2; Hutchinson 1996, 54; Willis 1974, 14–15).3 And, in regard to EvansPritchard’s characterization of the Nuer “social idiom” as a “bovine idiom,”

40

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 41

one must ask what this could mean other than a use of cattle as a metaphor or, more exactly, a pervasive conceptual metaphor. Nevertheless, an explicit use of “metaphor” in a non-linguistic or non-semantic sense by late twentieth-century anthropologists interpreting conceptual relations between humans and animals is more directly traceable to European structuralism, including, of course, Jakobson’s concept of metaphor. Besides Tambiah’s analysis of animals in Thai life and Crocker’s reanalysis of the Bororo identification of men and macaws, noteworthy instances include Geertz’s (1973) interpretation of Balinese fighting-cocks as metaphors of Balinese men and manhood, and Ohnuki-Tierney’s (1987) detailed investigation of the significance of the monkey in Japanese society. In addition, a particular interpretation of metaphor (or “lived metaphors”) has been central to phenomenological approaches in anthropology (Jackson 1996), while more recently Hurn (2012) has employed “metaphor” in a comparative discussion of human-animal relations in various cultural settings, including her own investigations of attitudes towards foxes and (human) “incomers” in rural Wales. Despite their various applications of a largely structuralist notion of metaphor, however, none of the foregoing authors has given much attention to conventional animal metaphors. In fact, few anthropologists have referred to “conventional metaphor” at all, though Roger Keesing (1985) has used the term to denote something more like conceptual metaphor (specifically as an alternative interpretation of what other anthropologists have understood as “beliefs” in existent entities), and Michelle Rosaldo (1980, 194) speaks of “rice” and “honey” as “conventional ways of talking about a wife” among the Ilongot. Although similarly not specifying them as such, in the present context a somewhat more important exception is Geertz’s brief discussion of conventional Balinese metaphors incorporating the cock as a vehicle and referring, for example, to a hero, dandy, lady killer, and to “a pompous man whose behavior presumes above his station” (described as a “tailless cock”). But these several verbal usages appear quite incidental to what the author calls the “deep psychological identification of Balinese men with their [fighting] cocks” (Geertz 1973, 417), which he demonstrates mostly with reference to a variety of practices, behaviours, and attitudes. Also, immediately after mentioning conventional cock metaphors, Geertz tellingly suggests, apparently underscoring his use of metaphor in a broader, analytical sense, that this identification (or, more specifically, the “intimacy of men with their cocks”) is “more than metaphorical” (415).

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

41

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 42

To the extent that Nuer identification of men and cattle might similarly be construed as metaphoric, it should be noted how, in this case too, Nuer employ conventional cattle metaphors – for example, designating leading men as “bulls,” described by Evans-Pritchard (1956, 254) as “a common metaphor of speech” – as well as metaphors involving other animals (notably ants [Evans-Pritchard 1956, 12]). On the other hand, rather than speaking of people as cattle, more often, it seems, Nuer describe cattle as people (as when a cow is called a man’s “mother”), and, as with the Balinese and their fighting-cocks, the pervasive relationship that obtains between men and cattle obviously entails far more than employing the animals as vehicles of figurative language. How Bororo men and macaws might figure in these comparisons is unclear since, quite remarkably after all the attention that has been given to this relationship, Crocker (1977a, 189) states that he never heard a Bororo spontaneously assert the proposition “we are red macaws.” Nevertheless, the proposition evidently amounts to more than a single conventional metaphor for, as mentioned earlier, it too finds expression in a variety of nonverbal media. The Question of Non-figurative “Metaphor” in Nage Human-Animal Relations Unlike totemism, where people expressly identify themselves with a particular animal (and possibly also unlike the Bororo in regard to macaws), only rarely do Nage employ conventional animal metaphors self-referentially, in the first person singular or plural. More often, Nage metaphors are expressed in the third person – “he is a dolphin”; “she is like a buffalo thinking of its offspring” – and even more frequently in the second person, in direct address to an individual or collection of individuals. Connected with this, most Nage animal metaphors convey a negative evaluation, being used to criticize a particular behaviour, to make fun of someone (including someone’s appearance), or to express annoyance or exasperation at the way people are conducting themselves. A number of Nage animal metaphors, however, diverge from these generalizations, partly because all can be used in the first person (“I am/we are X”) and partly because none is normally expressed as a simile. At least one of the exceptional usages, moreover, bears especially close comparison with the Bororo declaration (if such it is) that their men are red macaws, at least

42

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 43

as Crocker construes this. The Nage expression is “we are god’s chickens” (kita ana manu déwa, No. 266), a statement heard in songs of mourning (pata kasi) where it is supplemented by lyrics elaborating on this relationship, and which applies to all Nage and possibly to human beings in general. Crocker, it may be recalled, explains Bororo men’s identification with macaws as resting on an analogy involving a comparison between the position of men in relation to women in this matrilineal society and the situation of pet macaws, creatures owned almost entirely by women and housed in that part of Bororo settlements where women exercise a certain dominance. Particularly in his grounding of the representation in social experience, it should be pointed out that Crocker does not view the Bororo man-macaw connection as entailing “metaphor” in the sense Lévi-Strauss applied the concept to totemism – as a function of an entire system conjoining a series of natural kinds with a series of human categories or groups. Nor, as he demonstrates, does the identification derive from mystical ideas connecting humans, macaws, and spiritual entities, or other relations interpretable as metonymic or synecdochal (although certain Bororo attitudes and usages, he argues, do indeed reflect synecdoche or metonymy [Crocker 1977a, 168]). Crocker (1977b, 61) does, however, conclude that the Bororo idea that “men are red macaws” is a metaphor, specifically, a “complex internal metaphor” based in a substantial similarity of two analogous relationships involving not just men and birds but men, birds, and women, and expressive of “the irony of their masculine condition.” Although the Nage metaphor identifying humans as god’s chickens equally rests on analogy, an important difference from the Bororo identification of men and macaws lies in the fact that the interpretation is one proffered by Nage themselves. For, as they explained, “we are god’s chickens” means simply that, in relation to god, human beings are as small and dependant in matters of life and death as are domestic fowls in relation to their human owners, who call them together and – since chickens are regularly killed and eaten – determine the time and circumstances of their deaths. The Nage metaphor is therefore substantially identical to the previously mentioned Nuer ant metaphor, which describes humans as being “very tiny in respect to God” (Evans-Pritchard 1956, 12). In effect, then, Nage understand their metaphor as deriving from an “external analogy” (humans: god:: chickens: owners) involving two pairs of terms and, in this way, contrasting to the “internal analogy” (men: women:: macaws: women) and the “internal metaphor” that

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

43

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 44

Crocker sees as constitutive of Bororo men’s identification with macaws. As accords with their own interpretation, Nage denied that “we are god’s chickens” implies any mystical affinity (e.g., a common descent or spiritual identity) between chickens and humans, even though, by their own analysis, the expression turns on a relationship between humans and a spiritual third party – namely, “god.” By contrast, the Bororo representation is ultimately binary, involving only birds and humans, even though the second term admits a further distinction between men and women, and the analogy this latter distinction facilitates is furthermore implicit and contingent on a particular anthropological interpretation. Another difference concerns the quasihuman status Bororo accord red macaws, which are taboo and never eaten; by contrast, chickens are the domestic animal Nage kill and consume most often. And whereas the Bororo identification with macaws is manifest largely in ritual action, the Nage identification with domestic fowls finds expression only verbally, as one of a long list of metaphors (see chapter 4) where, with reference to specific actions, circumstances, or appearances, Nage compare people to chickens in a large variety of ways.4 Evidently, then, Nage identify less exclusively with chickens than Bororo apparently do with macaws. Nevertheless, despite this difference and others, Nage identifying humans with domestic fowls and Bororo men linking themselves with pet parrots are evidently based on conceptual relations of the same formal sort. In addition, both can be called contextual insofar as it is specifically in the context of relationships with women that Bororo men identify as macaws, just as it is only in relation to god – and then mostly in the context of death – that Nage speak of themselves collectively as chickens. In this connection one can readily endorse Crocker’s (1997b, 61) observation that “metaphor postulates the ‘identity’ of two different entities only in highly specific senses.” At the same time, this selectivity, as it can also be characterized, surely applies to symbolism in general – as opposed to empirical and folk taxonomic knowledge of animals, which, as noted in the previous chapter, operates with gestalts. Indeed, this last contrast underscores the difference between symbolic linkage of any sort and connections revealed in ethnotaxonomic classifications, where animals and plants are categorized not on the basis of analogy or selective resemblance but primarily with reference to comprehensive empirical observation of perceptual similarity and dissimilarity. Another Nage metaphor sometimes employed self-referentially and applied to a large section of Nage society – in fact, all Nage adult men, a speci-

44

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 45

fication revealing another commonality with the more famous Bororo usage – is “Nage dog(s)” (lako Nage, No. 107). As both observed usage and local commentary make clear, the phrase does not refer specifically to dogs as animals kept by Nage people, even though in this society it is indeed men rather than women who normally own dogs. Instead, it compares Nage men, and more specifically men of central Nage, to male dogs in regard to sexual appetite and their special reputation for engaging in multiple extramarital and premarital relationships. In fact, both in its interpretation and recognized motivation the usage compares closely with the American English metaphor “horn dog” and the apparently older African American proverb “a man’s got too much dog in him” (Liebow 1967, 121–2; see also the 1976 recording of this title by singer Shelbra Deane), and it is similarly comparable to the Yoruba use of “dog” (ajá) as a metaphorical reference to human “sexual incontinence/promiscuity” (Olatéju 2005, 372–3). Like Bororo and American counterparts, the Nage expression turns on analogy (men: women:: male dogs: bitches); it implies that Nage men are in a particular respect – heterosexual relations – like dogs or how Nage represent dogs to be; and, like the expression identifying humans as god’s chickens, it does not entail any mystical connection between people and dogs. In regard to the specificity of features involved in this usage, it should also be remarked that dogs figure in numerous other Nage conventional metaphors and that these focus on quite different attributes of dogs. Thus, while Nage men often identify closely with their dogs (Forth 2016, 86–90), by way of conventional metaphors all Nage compare themselves to dogs with reference to many diverse features of humans and canines, and although dog metaphors are more numerous than are metaphors employing most other animals, as metaphorical vehicles Nage do not treat dogs any differently from these. If neither the Nage description of themselves as “chickens of god” nor the reference to their men as “Nage dogs” implicates any mystical or substantial identification of humans beings with fowls or canines, then something quite different obtains with another animal, the water buffalo (Bubalis bubalis). As explained elsewhere (Forth 1998; Forth 2018a), Nage consider themselves, and especially their high-ranking men, as existing simultaneously as human beings and as buffalo, specifically buffalo kept, raised, and periodically slaughtered by mountain spirits (nitu, also nitu bapu or bapu). Accordingly, when these spirits prepare to sacrifice a spirit buffalo, a human somewhere suffers illness and, in the absence of ritual countermeasures, will subsequently die. In

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

45

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 46

this way, Nage identify themselves not with ordinary, earthly buffalo but with buffalo existing in spirit form and within an unseen realm of spirits, so the representation differs, for example, from the identity Bororo men recognize between themselves and ordinary, empirical birds. It should also be noted that Nage do not identify these spirit buffalo with their “souls” (mae), spiritual components of living persons that are susceptible to other kinds of malevolent spirits (most notably, human witches). Nevertheless, since the mountain spirits are conceived to own and use water buffalo in exactly the same way as do people, and because, within their own realm, these spirit buffalo take the same form as earthly buffalo, Nage are connected with buffalo in a categorical sense. And the same applies to the buffalo-owing spirits, by virtue of the inverse idea that, whenever Nage slaughter an earthly buffalo, a spirit meets its end. For Nage, therefore, buffalo form part of a trichotomous relationship further linking spirits and humans, a relationship I have previously called “reciprocal inversion” (Forth 1998). Viewed as a set of analogical relations – wherein spirits are to spirit buffalo and spirit buffalo are to humans as humans are to earthly buffalo and earthly buffalo to spirits – in these ideas one also discovers the basis of a further identification of humans and anthropomorphous spirits that finds expression in Nage claims that spirits (nitu) regard human beings as spirits (nitu) and themselves as humans (342–3). Identifying humans in different ways with both spirits and spirit buffalo, it should be mentioned how this complex of ideas differs from Viveiros de Castro’s (1998) “perspectivist” version of animism, wherein animals are said to assume human form in some hidden dimension while humans similarly have a partial existence as empirical game animals. For in the Nage idea, the fundamental relationship is not between humans and animals but between humans and spirits, even though an animal figures as the medium by which spirits and humans have, as it were, aggressive access to one another. Indeed, the Nage representation is more suggestive of what another neo-animist writer (Descola 2013) dubs “analogism.” Insofar as Nage conceive of spirits raising and killing buffalo much in the same way as humans, there is in this idea an obvious parallel with the “chickens of god” metaphor, where god is represented as determining the fate of humans in a way similar to buffalo-owning spirits. Indeed, one might be inclined to treat the two ideas as expressions of a single representation employing different sacrificial animals, in part because Nage employ “chicken” as a

46

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 47

metaphorical understatement designating a more valuable animal, including a buffalo (see No. 298). But beyond this formal similarity is a fundamental ontological difference. Besides the fact that Nage normally speak of “god” (déwa, ga’e déwa) and buffalo-owning spirits (nitu) as quite different sorts of beings, the idea that human beings are buffalo owned by spirits is definitely not a figurative usage, like describing humans as god’s chickens or Nage men as dogs. Indeed, unlike these usages, “we are buffalo,” although expressing an idea Nage would certainly recognize, is not an assertion they themselves ordinarily make but is instead a proposition entailed in Nage spiritual cosmology, a pattern of ideas expressed both in myth (Forth 1998, 25–30) and in ritual action and interpretations thereof offered by ritual specialists. As Nage affirmed, the proposition that humans are spirit buffalo is not an instance of pata péle, a “statement that separates or covers” – which is to say a metaphor – but something that is taken as “true” (tebhe) and that Nage themselves usually do not analyze or question. Consistent with this recognized difference, the relationship between humans and (spirit) buffalo is quite different from relations of similarity between buffalo and humans expressed in Nage conventional metaphors. For one thing, being simultaneously spirit buffalo is an existential property of human beings. It is both permanent and consequential, specifically in the sense that what spirits do to their buffalo is thought to have real effects in the form of human illness or death. By contrast, nothing remotely similar applies to the twenty conventional buffalo metaphors Nage apply to humans or, for that matter, to any of their other conventional animal metaphors. That is, calling someone a “buffalo that wrecks its enclosure” (No. 13), for example, is simply declarative and practical, describing certain human actions. And while the statement, if applied to someone in direct address, could result in anger, resentment, or hurt feelings, Nage would not see it as having any physical effect comparable to what is supposed to occur when a spirit sacrifices a spirit buffalo. From these differences, which amount to what can be called a cognitive separation between two unconnected conceptions of the human-buffalo relationship, it comes as no surprise that Nage possess no conventional metaphors describing people as “buffalo” with reference to their susceptibility to attack by spirits. In this respect, then, the Nage representation seems to differ, for example, from the Balinese identification of men with fighting-cocks,

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

47

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 48

which appears completely continuous with conventional metaphors employing the cock. Rather than supernatural connections with either humans or spirits, moreover, Nage conventional buffalo metaphors reflect a thoroughly naturalistic representation of the animal Bubalis bubalis informed by regularly observed attributes of empirical buffalo or, far less often, by uses to which the animals are put (e.g., as bridewealth) and, in only in a single case (No. 2), does a metaphor reflect a belief concerning a special supra-empirical power ascribed to some earthly buffalo. In addition, Nage deploy these attributes, individually and selectively, in talking about actions or attitudes of individual humans – including, for example, behaviour suggesting a person taking after a parent (No. 11), acting like “a dog in the manger” (No. 12), “fouling one’s own nest” (No. 13), excessive attachment to children (No. 14), and behaving in a curmudgeonly manner (No. 16). From these examples, it will also be noticed how some replicate English conventional metaphors, although ones whose vehicles are of course quite different animals. In contrast, the mystical conception of humans as spirit buffalo pertains neither to ordinary dealings with buffalo nor regular social interaction with other human beings but solely to buffalo sacrifice, including occasions when people experience physical or mental distress and suspect they might be victims of spirit sacrifice – and therefore consider sacrificing one of their own buffalo as a remedy. By the same token, in mundane contexts – when herding buffalo, watering or taking the animals to graze, installing them in enclosures, or, nowadays, employing buffalo in puddling wet rice fields – Nage do not speak of, nor by all indications do they think about, the animals as embodiments of dangerous spirits. And it is, of course, precisely these mundane interactions with water buffalo that inform Nage conventional metaphors that employ the buffalo as their vehicle. All of the foregoing applies equally to another spiritual belief, although one that, it should be stressed, is not in any way articulated with the representation of humans as spirit buffalo. This is the idea that, in the domain of forest spirits (also designated as nitu), Giant rats (Papagomys armandvillei) exist as buffalo belonging to the spirits (bhada nitu) – one of a series of propositions representing wild mammals as the spirits’ domestic animals (Forth 2016, 135–40). These propositions too are not figurative usages, nor do they inform any conventional metaphors, employing Giant rats or any other wild animal.

48

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 49

Concluding Remarks Even if some anthropologists might be inclined to apply a concept of metaphor to the Nage representation of humans as spirit buffalo – something I have not found particularly useful to do either here or in previous writings – it is clear that what can broadly be called their symbolic use of this animal admits at least two quite separate forms that suggest different kinds of cognitive processing. In one, evident in conventional animal metaphors, specific empirical features of an animal, physical or behavioural, are redeployed to construct a variety of figurative expressions used to talk about individual humans or other things that are not animals. In the other, a general identification of humans with spirit buffalo most likely has its basis in the imaginative conjecture that, just as humans raise and sacrifice domestic animals, so by analogy there might be something that raises and sacrifices humans. And this compelling and indeed counterintuitive idea has evidently “caught on” and been maintained as an article of Nage cosmology, something people accept as true or possibly true. As demonstrated, however, exactly the same analogy is replicated in the expressly figurative proposition whereby Nage declare themselves to be god’s chickens. Hence one product of this discussion is the hardly surprising conclusion that formally identical propositions apparently identifying human beings as non-human animals can be understood by users in ontologically or epistemologically very different ways. Whatever other merits it might have, applying “metaphor” to both would therefore be unfortunate – certainly it would make little sense to Nage – and a case can easily be made for restricting “metaphor” to figurative usages, in other words to conventional metaphor, as does Sandor (1986, 103) when he forthrightly asserts that “no metaphor occurs where none is recognized.” Non-figurative propositions might then simply be designated as “beliefs.” There is, of course, nothing new about this. As shown, a contrast of “metaphor” and “belief ” runs throughout Evans-Pritchard’s interpretation of Nuer religion. Rather more recently, in a study of African sorcery, West (2007) rejects any application of “metaphor” to statements informants insist are literally true, cleverly (and perhaps metaphorically) characterizing such interpretations as a form of sorcery employed by ethnographers. A contrast of metaphor and belief is also employed by Sperber (1975) in his cognitive theory of symbolism, specifically where he distinguishes varieties

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

49

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 50

of symbolic cognition as “belief ” and “figure” (by which he transparently refers to conventional metaphor). Of course, symbolism is an aspect not only of thought and language but also of actions, and one merit of Sperber’s theory is his linking of “figure” and “belief,” respectively, with “mime” and “sacrifice.” Why instead of “sacrifice” he does not employ the more general category “ritual” (which would include magic and taboo) is unclear, but whatever the reason, the point is that, by contrast to mime, sacrifice (or ritual) is typically understood by participants as possessing efficacy – as making rather than simply marking a change – and as thereby corresponding to “belief ” as something pertaining to entities accepted as efficacious and consequential. It hardly needs remarking that “belief ” is a highly problematic category of cross-cultural comparison, not least because of its association with the doctrinal faith crucial to Christianity (Needham 1972). However, no suitable substitute is plainly available. Even apart from its established use in linguistics as a reference to themes informing conventional metaphors, “conceptual metaphor” will not do, especially because conceptual metaphors are themselves metaphoric and are likely to be recognized as such by users of derivative conventional metaphors. (Think, for example, of “people are animals,” which, before Linnaeus and Darwin, English-speakers employing conventional animal metaphors could not have accepted as anything other than a figurative proposition.) As the contrary of “metaphor,” “belief” is an acceptable reference to ideas not subject to empirical test – such as human beings having a parallel existence as spirit buffalo – so long as the term is understood as referring to propositions that a community accepts uncritically, without analyzing them in relation to other items of knowledge that could discredit them. Thus defined, it is of course this unanalyzed quality of “beliefs” that distinguishes them from (conventional) metaphors. As demonstrated by Nage recognition of their animal metaphors as pata péle (“separating or covering speech”), which is to say figurative expressions that cannot be taken literally, metaphors are indeed statements that have effectively been analyzed and have been found, as it were, acceptably deviant (cf. Sandor 1986, 105–6) in relation to other uses of the same words. Sperber (1975) employs the unanalyzed quality of certain propositions as the primary criterion in distinguishing symbolic knowledge (or “symbolism in general,” the translation of the original French title of his book) from empirical or “encyclopaedic” knowledge. However, insofar as conventional metaphors are a form of symbolism, they must be a

50

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 51

special kind, and contrary to Sperber, who simply treats “metaphor” (or “figure”) and “belief ” as two manifestations of a single form of cognition, they must reflect a special form of symbolic thinking – one that is consciously or expressly symbolic. Expressed another way, with metaphors disbelief is deliberately suspended and knowingly so (Sandor 1986, 117; see also Levin 1993, 121) since this suspension is necessary to preserve the connection between source (vehicle) and target (interpretation or referent) and, hence, the social, intellectual, or emotional value of the metaphor. As will become clear in chapter 8, distinguishing metaphor and belief as cognitively different kinds of representation is essential to understanding why beliefs linking animals with spirits play virtually no part in motivating Nage animal metaphors, and why, instead, such metaphors typically draw directly on empirical features of animals or (in a far smaller number of cases) utilitarian practices involving animals. However analyzed, some distinction between metaphor and belief should find favour among proponents of ontological pluralism, the position discussed at the beginning of this chapter, especially since pluralists evidently reject any application of metaphor to anything they interpret a society’s members accepting as real or as involving an actual connection (or an absence of a distinction) between things. This of course would particularly apply to nonWestern societies, conceived as possessing ontologies radically different from the ontological “naturalism” attributed exclusively to Western thought. Yet it remains unclear how ontological pluralists could subscribe to a comparative deployment of any conception of metaphor. For accepting consciously figurative forms of language as anything other than an artefact of a peculiarly Western ontology, and more particularly as a regular way of expressing ideas in societies deemed to be “animist” (or at least not “naturalist’), would appear to undermine, or at least seriously qualify, a representation of animism – a perspective that recognizes no essential difference between humans and nonhumans – as a dominant, pervasive, or virtually exclusive way of thinking about and experiencing the world. By the same token, pluralists might want to argue that a statement like “we are god’s chickens” reveals a Nage conception of a real identity between humans and chickens. As shown, this view finds no support in what Nage themselves say about this or their other animal metaphors, nor indeed in their representation of conventional metaphors as pata péle (“covering speech”) – an indigenous understanding consistent with the bulk of ethnographic evidence revealing that Nage cannot be

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

51

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 52

called “animists” or exclusive adherents to any “ontology” radically different from “naturalism (Forth 2016; Forth 2018b). At the same time – and hardly surprisingly in view of their implicitly wholesale rejection of metaphor, both as an indigenous and as an analytical category – ontological pluralists, even those who, like Descola and Viveiros de Castro (e.g., Viveiros de Castro 2004), focus on human-animal relations, have not explicitly attended to conventional animal metaphors, or to what can most reasonably and parsimoniously be construed as such. So it remains uncertain how they would regard these or any other kind of apparently figurative discourse among members of smallscale non-Western societies – if indeed they recognize them at all. In addition, some proponents of the “ontological turn” apparently entertain parallel reservations about the concept of belief (Holbraad and Petersen 2017, 192–4). These circumstances, then, point to the special importance of a comprehensive study of animal metaphors in a society like that of the Nage, the possible ontological significance of which I further address in chapter 9. In the next several chapters, however, I focus on individual metaphors and how Nage employ and understand them in the course of their daily lives.

52

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 53

3 Domestic Mammal Metaphors – and Some Wild Variants

Referring to all animals, ana wa has its prototype in mammals and especially large domestic animals. More than any other kind of animal, mammals are vehicles for the greatest number of Nage animal metaphors, comprising over 42 percent (240 of 566) of the total. The next highest is birds, at 31 percent (178). As demonstrated elsewhere, “mammal” operates as a psychologically salient category – a life form taxon – in Nage folk taxonomy. Although the category is not labelled by a single word, Nage will use lako wawi, “dog [and] pig,” a standard composite, to refer to mammals as a group distinct from other animals – for example, when talking about mating practices or methods of reproduction. In discussing individual metaphors, I divide mammals into domestic and wild kinds (treated in chapter 4), reviewing these in the same order followed in Forth (2016). Thus the present chapter begins with water buffalo metaphors and ends with metaphors incorporating cats, while chapter 4 starts with deer metaphors and ends with expressions incorporating the monkey. Although cats and pigs both comprise “domestic” and “wild” kinds, distinguished with the qualifiers bo’a (“village”) and witu (“forest”; see e.g., wawi bo’a, “village pigs,” and wawi witu, “forest pigs”), largely to facilitate comparison with Nage mammal knowledge described in Forth (2016) I deal with all pig and all cat metaphors in the present chapter. How far this distinction is significant for metaphorical uses of the two animals is then discussed in individual commentaries. Nage folk taxonomy includes eighteen named folk-generic categories of mammals (Forth 2016, 253, table 11.1). All of these are employed metaphorically with the exception of ana menge or dhéke menge (denoting mice and

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 54

small rats) and dhéke ngewo (a large forest rat). What is more, the first, especially, is implicitly encompassed by several metaphors employing dhéke (see Nos. 180–96), interpreted as a more inclusive “intermediate” taxon (sensu Berlin 1992) subsuming five generic categories of rats and mice, though also referring contextually to large commensal rats (specifiable as dhéke méze, “big rat”). The only mammal “folk-specifics” used metaphorically are ngo ngoe, denoting what Nage conceive to be a specific kind of wild cat (meo; Forth 2016, 99–101; Forth 2017b), and wawi witu, specifying wild pigs.

WATER BUFFALO • Bubalus bubalis • BHADA Larger than both horses and recently introduced cattle, water buffalo are the largest animals known to Nage. They are also the most valuable, being the most expensive component of bridewealth and the premier animal sacrifice. In both respects, it is interesting that the name bhada is related to words in other Indonesian languages meaning “wealth,” thus paralleling English “cattle” in relation to “chattel.” Until recently Nage were familiar with buffalo not only as domestic livestock but also as feral animals and objects of the hunt. With just one or two exceptions (Nos. 4, 13), however, Nage buffalo metaphors have their source in the domestic animal. 1. Ancient horns Tadu waja Someone who has lived long and thus possesses much life experience As the horns in question are those of buffalo, the usage is comparable to “buffalo measuring their horns” (No. 17). As Nage confirmed, the expression links people metaphorically with old, mature buffalo whose horns have grown long, and so it is quite different from the Nage belief according to which people who attain an extraordinary age will actually grow a small tail (Forth 2018a). 2. Buffalo able to transform Bhadha bali be’o A duplicitous person, a trickster; a clever person able to adapt readily to circumstances

54

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 55

The term describes a male buffalo reserved for sacrifice that is reputedly able to temporarily assume the form of a human being, sometimes its male owner (Forth 1998, 54, 166–8). Such buffalo are also claimed to be capable, while still tethered, of somehow travelling to distant places and doing damage to other people’s crops. In contrast to metaphors grounded in the behaviour of ordinary buffalo, the phrase thus reflects a belief in the supernatural powers of some sacrificial buffalo, and although it applies only to a small number of individual animals, it is apparently related to the close identification of sacrificial victims and human owners found in many societies. Some Nage attribute the powers of transforming buffalo specifically to a special spiritual quality called mae mango, although this entity is also spoken of as a collective power pertaining to buffalo in general. If there is any connection between the notion of “transforming buffalo” and the idea that humans exist simultaneously as buffalo belonging to spirits (chapter 2), it was not articulated in Nage statements about this metaphor. Where “transforming buffalo” is used in the sense of a duplicitous person, it is usually uttered as a warning to others to beware of someone. In the other sense, it can function as a proverb advising people to emulate such fantastic animals (“we should be like transforming buffalo,” kita ngusa bhia bali be’o). 3. Buffalo bull sniffing a female buffalo’s urine Bhada ingo cio A person with an excessively serious or pained facial expression Apart from informant specifications, the fact that the urine belongs to a cow buffalo is indicated by cio, which, in contrast to suka (“male urination, urination in general”), specifies a woman urinating. As Nage say stallions and males of imported cattle habitually sniff at the urine of mares and cows in the same way, the specification of buffalo appears somewhat arbitrary. 4. Buffalo carrying vines on top of its head Bhada su’u koba A person who carries a heavy load but fails to tie it up or otherwise secure it properly In this circumstance the load is likely to come apart and its contents are likely to fall. In a broader sense, the metaphor can describe someone who works

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

55

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 56

Figure 1 Buffalo with a nose-ring (No. 7)

hard but in a disorderly and thus ineffective or ineffectual way. Usually expressed as a simile, the first application therefore entails a simple physical comparison whereas the second conveys a more abstract, moral allusion. The phrase describes a feral buffalo that is rummaging in the forest and whose head and horns become entangled in jungle vines. Typically in this situation, the vines do not become so firmly attached that they will not soon come loose and fall off. 5. Buffalo defecating as it moves Bhada ta’i la’a A messy, untidy person, especially in the performance of some task One use of the metaphor I recorded was “you work like a buffalo shitting as it walks” (kau kema bia bhada ta’i la’a). As noted for the metaphorical use of

56

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 57

“buffalo dung” (No. 6), the animal’s excrement characteristically forms a solid clump, but when a buffalo defecates as it moves, the faeces obviously become scattered, fouling a wider area. 6. Buffalo dung Ta’i bhada Someone who never changes or is immoveable and difficult to shift Usually expressed as “to live like buffalo dung,” the metaphor can convey a negative evaluation. Nevertheless, Some Nage interpret it as referring to a group of people that is united, or at least residentially not scattered or dispersed. Buffalo faeces characteristically form a solid, immobile heap, unlike the droppings of some other animals, and in the same regard a contrasting metaphor is “goat droppings” (No. 70). In English idioms, shit of any sort usually if not invariably conveys negative associations. For Nage, by contrast, dung in certain respects can represent a positive value. Another expression exploiting the same image is “a whetstone stuck in a clump of buffalo dung” (watu dhédhe ena ta’i bhada), referring to someone who visits a place and will not leave. 7. Buffalo fitted with a nose-ring Bhada tusu héle People who simply follows others, who will do anything they are told and obey instructions automatically and without thought An alternative is “buffalo tied by a nose-ring” (bhada ike héle). Although obedience and following orders are naturally valued by Nage, this phrase expresses a negative judgment. Perhaps most significantly in this context, Nage fit buffalo with nose-rings – traditionally made of a kind of liana – when leading them to slaughter. (Figure 1 shows a buffalo with a modern nose-ring.) The Nage metaphor is obviously comparable to English “lead (someone) by the nose.” 8. Buffalo goes first, horse follows Bhada ulu, ja dhéko A prominent, authoritative person who is followed by someone less influential or of lower standing

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

57

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 58

The metaphor is usually applied to men and alludes to the requirement that, with every buffalo given as bridewealth, a horse must be provided as well. Thus Nage commonly express bridewealth amounts simply by referring to a number of buffalo, its being understood that the same number of horses should also be given. The precedence of buffalo in this context is further shown in the standard composite phrase bhada ja, “buffalo [and] horses,” where “buffalo” always comes before “horses.” A more elaborate expression is bhada ja wea, “buffalo, horses, [and] gold,” the three principal components of bridewealth, incorporating both livestock and metal goods. 9. Buffalo in the shade Bhada au bao A person who is constantly chewing on food or betel and areca nut As Nage remarked, buffalo will regularly make chewing motions while standing in a shady spot even though they are not actually eating or grazing – an apparent reference to chewing the cud. Recorded just once, the phrase can be applied critically to someone who is largely inactive and, perhaps annoyingly, appears to do little more than eat or chew. (The nut of the areca palm and the leaf or fruit of the betel vine are traditionally chewed, together with lime, as a mild intoxicant.) 10. Buffalo mounting a dog Bhada saka lako A high-ranking man who marries or cohabits with a woman of lower rank Saka, “to mount, ride,” denotes riding a horse (saka ja) but also refers to sexual mounting. Apart from using animals to talk about humans, the expression is also metaphorical or, more specifically, metonymic insofar as it employs the sexual act to allude to a wider conjugal relationship. With regard to traditional Nage society, the phrase would often refer to a master, or “nobleman” (mosa laki, No. 20), who cohabits with a female slave or concubine (fai sada taga, “wife for resting the legs”). In this last phrase, “wife” is itself metaphorical insofar as marriage was not formally possible between people of unequal rank, and a lower-ranking wife was not recognized as a “true, proper, legitimate wife” (fai laki) in a union legitimated by an exchange of bridewealth and counter-gift. The person of higher rank is thus identified

58

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 59

by the larger and more valuable animal (the buffalo) and the lower-ranking partner by the smaller and less valuable (the dog). Buffalo and dogs figure as major and minor components of bridewealth and other goods given by wife-taking to wife-giving affines. The distinction of rank between dog and buffalo applies in the same way in the opposite situation, expressed as “a dog mounting a buffalo” (No. 91), where a lower-ranking man enters a relationship with a higher-ranking woman. In both instances it is the male who “mounts” the female. 11. Buffalo over in Kawa follows its forebear(s), moved to a new enclosure it sticks to the old ways Bhada lépa Kawa dhuzu dhi ngata, séso pau kopo tedu [or dhéko] ta’a olo A person who (despite changed circumstances) continues to take after his or her parent A proverb, the expression is most often applied to a woman who misbehaves sexually, having affairs with other men even after she has married and moved to her husband’s residence (the new “enclosure,” a stone corral or other place where buffalo are stalled), thus taking after her mother or, perhaps, another senior female relative. Commentators compared the usage to a botanical metaphor, although one that applies equally to men. This is “fruit that does not fall far from the tree” (ze’a bedhu mona zeu ena pu’u ngata), a usage that replicates the virtually identical English proverb “the apple does not fall far from the tree.” Both Nage usages are significant as they attest to a conception of negative character traits or tendencies being inherited from parents. How far this is thought to derive from example as opposed to something passed physically from parent to child is difficult to say. However, Nage do possess an idea of physical inheritance, expressed in metaphors of “blood” (‘a) and “seed” (wini). The present expression is heard in variant forms. Sometimes “old ways” (ta’a olo, or “what is old, past”) is replaced by wini ta’a olo, “old seed,” in which respect it is noteworthy that “seed” refers metaphorically to women, especially women transferred in marriage. Understood as a reference to parents or ascendants, dhi (more generally “side, edge”) should be compared to dhi ‘a, “side of the blood,” a term contextually applied to ancestors in general or, specifically, to lineal ascendants through women. Tedu and dhéko

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

59

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 60

(“to follow, succeed”) are synonyms. The referent of kawa is somewhat uncertain, although most commentators understood it as a particular place: Kawa Labo, in the Labo (Lambo) district to the northeast of central Nage. Together with the fact that lépa is a deictic directional term used in Géro and other areas to the northeast (and equivalent to central Nage zale), this would suggest that the proverb is adopted from elsewhere. Kawa is also interpretable as “cave, rock shelter” (more completely kawa so), places where buffalo released to graze freely, as well as feral buffalo, often take shelter. On the other hand, the occurrence of Labo as a geographical name in a similar metaphor for disobedient wives (No. 87) suggests a synecdochical reference to any distant place. 12. Buffalo that blocks the wallow Bhada pe poma Someone who prevents others from joining in what he or she is doing, a monopoliser who wants to keep something all for him- or herself Pe is a contracted form of péle, “to block, bar, obstruct; to lie athwart” (see chapter 2). As the phrase describes a buffalo wallowing in a muddy pool (poma) that obstructs other buffalo from entering, it is comparable to the English animal metaphors “to hog (something)” and “road hog.” Also similar is English “dog in the manger,” derived from one of Aesop’s fables (Palmatier 1995, 116), although this specifically refers to someone who keeps others from partaking of or enjoying something that the person him- or herself does not want or cannot make use of. 13. Buffalo that wrecks its enclosure Bhada léga oka People who cause trouble within their own house or settlement or do damage to their own group The phrase can also be used more generally for a troublemaker. Oka denotes a temporary enclosure of bamboo, obviously more fragile and more easily damaged than a stone corral (kopo), and can more specifically refer to an enclosure built for a single buffalo destined for sacrifice or one housing a feral buffalo or horse one wishes to break or tame. In the present usage, the buffalo’s enclosure refers less to a physical house or village than to a social group,

60

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 61

the unity of which a troublesome person can damage. The Nage metaphor is thus effectively synonymous with English “fouling one’s own nest,” meaning “to disgrace your own family; to destroy your own environment” (Palmatier 1995, 155). 14. Buffalo thinking of its calf Bhada he ana A mother or father closely attached to her or his children The metaphor more particularly expresses what Nage consider unusual or excessive parental affection and is mostly applied to situations in which parental love or attachment becomes a particular issue. For example, one man used it in mildly rebuking his wife who was habitually reluctant to leave their young children in the care of others when she had to leave home for any length of time. Another instance concerned a man whose wife had left him and, somewhat unusually, insisted on retaining the children. According to one interpretation, buffalo are the appropriate animal vehicle because cow buffalo become aggressive when one attempts to separate them from unweaned calves and will make great efforts to return to them. In another view, the selection of buffalo mostly reflects their status as the most valuable and largest of livestock. 15. Buffalo tied by the horns Bhada ike tadu A recalcitrant or rebellious person who will not accept what others say and is difficult to persuade If a rope is tied to a buffalo’s horns, as is done in the sacrificial procedure known as pa sése where the animals are slaughtered while running relatively freely on the end of a long cable, the animal is unlikely to follow when one pulls on the rope and is likely to struggle – in contrast to a buffalo tethered by a nose-ring (No. 7). 16. Buffalo in foul-smelling water Bhada ae wau A person who is discontent and so appears angry or dissatisfied

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

61

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 62

The usual reference is a man or woman who is by nature generally discontented or dissatisfied – a curmudgeon or carper whom others try to avoid. But it more specifically refers to a facial expression suggesting anger, dissatisfaction, or disgruntlement and so can also designate a temporary or less permanent disposition (cf. English “turning up one’s nose [at something]”). The metaphor describes a buffalo that, following one especially articulate account, goes to a waterhole to drink but finds the water dirty and smelly, likely having been fouled by faeces, and thus declines to drink. Waterholes or wallows are indeed often dirty and full of dung. But whether water buffalo are really as particular as the metaphor would suggest seems unlikely. 17. Buffaloes measuring (or testing) their horns Bhada zagu tadu Two individuals or parties testing their mutual strength in some competitive exchange The image pertains to two bull buffalo butting their horns against one another until one gives in. Accordingly, the phrase usually refers to two men or two groups led by men. One example is two young men sparring in the traditional pugilistic competitions called etu (Forth 1998); the expression is also applied to contestants who, in terms of age, size, and strength, appear equally matched. Another example is competitive negotiations between two parties over bridewealth, where the bride’s group (the wife-giver) may begin by requesting a large number of buffalo. The husband’s group then responds by requesting in return a large number of pigs and textiles (components of the wife-taker’s counter-gift) until an agreement is finally reached. At the beginning of negotiations, neither side will know for certain the capacity of the other to provide, so in this instance the metaphor alludes to an attempt to extract the greatest amount possible from the other party. 18. Cow buffalo that urges (or leads) others on Bhada metu ngati A provocateur; a tempter or temptress who leads another astray Examples of referents included a particular woman (now deceased) who, for a fee, would recruit men for sexual liaisons with young women, especially at festivals or other large gatherings where people celebrate well into the evening

62

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 63

or overnight. Another concerned someone who encourages others to engage in gambling games or to wage more than they are initially inclined to do. Nage explained the motivation in two slightly different ways. According to one, the metaphor reflects the use of a buffalo cow as “bait” to attract bull buffalo (including free-ranging bulls) either to mate or simply to draw a herd together and follow a herder – as is also done with other large livestock. According to another commonly voiced interpretation, a buffalo herd is always led by one or more female animals while other buffalo, including all the males, follow behind. Such a categorical claim would appear unlikely, although no one seriously questioned it, and I also recorded it in the Lio region. On the other hand, there is a further idea that, while the females go in front when a buffalo herd moves, they are driven by males that push from behind or occasionally from the side or towards the front and so ultimately determine the direction in which the herd travels. The Nage metaphor somewhat recalls English “bellwether,” referring to a harbinger, something that indicates or predicts something else, which originally denoted a castrated ram around whose neck a bell is hung and who leads a flock of sheep. As a harbinger, however, the ram usually evokes something positive whereas in the Nage usage the female buffalo is always negative. 19. Following the cow (buffalo), coming behind the mare Dhéko moka, tedu metu A man who resides temporarily with his wife’s family because bridewealth is not fully discharged Since moka (a young female mammal) and metu (an older female that has given birth) denote females of all kinds of larger livestock, “cow” and “mare” are somewhat arbitrary. Nevertheless, this can be treated as a buffalo metaphor because, while both buffalo and horses compose the principal part of a bridewealth, Nage always describe this as “buffalo [and] horse(s)” (bhada ja) and never the other way around, and also because they speak of horses in this context as accompanying buffalo (see No. 8). That the metaphor refers to a uxorilocally resident husband is explained by the fact that such a man follows his wife (represented by the female animals) and also by the fact that, moving from his own group to the woman’s, he travels in the same direction as did that part of a bridewealth already given to his in-laws.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

63

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 64

20. True bull (buffalo) Mosa laki Person of highest rank Although mosa refers to the males of nearly all mammals (Forth 2016, 151– 4), in this expression it is understood as referring specifically to water buffalo. The Nage relationship to buffalo is in several respects comparable to what Evans-Pritchard (1940) described for cattle among the East African Nuer, who similarly designate leading men as “bulls.” Laki is is related to words in other Indonesian languages meaning “man, male, husband” (senses of Nage haki) but in Nage means “true, genuine, legitimate.” As a reference to individuals, mosa laki always refers to men, specifically male leaders; however, as the name of a social rank, it can include women as well. 21. Buffalo cricket Cico bhada A large kind of cricket This is one of several folk taxonomic names in which “buffalo” (bhada) specifies the larger or largest of two or more sub-classes. Comparable English usages incorporating large domestic animals include “bull” in “bullfrog,” “bulltrout,” and “bulrush,” and “horse” in “horse chestnut” and “horseradish” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary; Palmatier 1995, 200). A smaller, edible kind of cricket is called “pig cricket” (No. 135). 22. Buffalo leech Mate bhada A large kind of leech A smaller kind of leech is called “chicken leech” (No. 287) 23. Buffalo flatworm Mage bhada A large kind of terrestrial planarian (or flatworm; phylum Platyhelminthes, class Turbellaria).

64

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 65

A smaller kind is simply named mage, this term also denoting the more inclusive category. 24. Buffalo basil Hasi bhada A type of herb Used as a spice, this is possibly Ocimum basilicum, or Great basil. As Nage explain, the plant is named after buffalo because its leaves are larger than those of two other sorts of hasi (hasi biasa and hasi lowo). 25. Buffalo coconut Nio bhada A variety of coconut palm So named because of its very large nuts, larger than those of other coconut palms (nio). The main contrast is the “dove coconut” (No. 407). 26. Buffalo ginger Lea bhada A type of ginger plant The largest sort, the plant contrasts to “dog ginger” (No. 113) and “chicken ginger” (No. 290). 27. Buffalo’s uvula Ngade bhada A sort of grass In neighbouring Ngadha, one referent of ngade is Paspalum conjugatum (Verheijen 1990, 34), a species of crown grass that, interestingly enough, sometimes bears the English name “buffalo grass.” Nage ngade means “uvula” (more completely known as lasu ngade), and two commentators suggested the grass was so named because it is similarly hard or tough and difficult to uproot.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

65

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 66

28. Buffalo testicle lemon Mude ‘ade bhada A large citrus The fruit is so named because it grows to the size of a buffalo’s testicles. 29. Buffalo testicle tuber Kéwa ‘ade bhada A sort of edible tuber The tuber is thus named because in regard to its size, round shape, and lack of root hairs it is seen to resemble a buffalo’s testicles. 30. Buffalo weed Bete bhada A kind of plant

Figure 2 “Dove” and “buffalo” coconuts (No. 25)

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 67

Verheijen (1990) gives “buffalo weed” (bete kamba) in Lio as Sida acuta, a flowering plant, and in Ngadha (bete kaba) as a flowering plant in the mint family (Lamiaceaae). Nage bete appears to have no meaning other than as a plant name. Kamba and kaba are the Lio and Ngadha terms for “buffalo.” 31. Earth buffalo Bhada tana A human corpse or soul turned into a sacrificial victim by witches The usage reflects a mortuary belief according to which cannibalistic witches (polo), living humans who have fallen under the control of malevolent spirits, will transform a newly buried person (either the corpse or the soul) into a buffalo and then slaughter and devour the animal in a nocturnal feast. Whether all recently deceased people undergo this fate is not specified, but Nage mortuary rites include acts and precautions predicated on this idea (Forth 1998). 32. Trough buffalo Bhada kana A pig sacrificed in place of a buffalo Kana is a container for pig feed. As the usage entails referring to a pig as a “buffalo,” it is clearly metaphorical. As anthropologists will recognize, the practice of sacrificing something of lesser value when a prescribed sacrifice is unavailable is widespread and is perhaps most famously and dramatically illustrated by the Nuer practice of “sacrificing” a cucumber in place of an ox (Evans-Pritchard 1956). Among Nage, substitution is not always possible and in fact is allowed only in critical rituals, such as when a buffalo should be slaughtered in order to counter serious illness. With regard to the concept of “earth buffalo” (No. 31), substituting a buffalo with a pig is apparently also possible among witches. 33. Buffalo’s back (hut) (Kéka) logo bhada A kind of building Used for storage or as temporary accommodation, such huts have both gable ends open and a pitched roof that notionally resembles a buffalo’s back.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

67

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 68

HORSE • Equus caballus • JA (dialectal jara) When exactly horses were introduced to Flores is not known (Forth 2016, 79–82). Apart from their use as bridewealth and in other contexts of exchange, Nage value horses as a means of transporting people and goods, and although nowadays they are being increasingly replaced by motor vehicles, horses are still used as mounts, and Nage, who are skilled riders, always use horses during the annual ritual hunt. All of these usages, as well as the general care of horses, are referenced in the metaphors listed below. 34. Coming behind the mare, Tedu metu. See Following the cow (No. 19) 35. Fine stallion Ja mosa modhe A handsome man Although modhe has the general sense of “good,” it more specifically means “good-looking” in regard to both men and women. In English, “stallion” and “stud” similarly refer to virile or sexually attractive men; however, the Nage usage concerns a man’s dress and demeanour as much as his bodily appearance. 36. Horse down in the plain Ja lau mala A person who lives freely or is unrestrained The usual referent is someone who travels about without good reason, being absent from home for several days at a time – a decidedly negative trait for Nage. The source of the metaphor is a horse left free to graze in the plains. Whereas central Nage villages mostly occupy the lower northwestern slopes of the Ebu Lobo volcano, mala (“lowland, plain”) denotes the lower-lying, less accidented and less inhabited area to the north, located in the seaward direction (lau, also translating as “down, downstream”). Although since the 1940s or 1950s parts of this region have been turned over to wet rice cultivation, this is where Nage villagers would formerly release horses and buffalo to roam freely. As this should suggest, “horse down in the plain” designates a

68

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 69

free-ranging horse that is beyond the immediate control of human owners. (It does not, I was assured, refer to feral horses, although these too were once found in the plains.) Because the metaphor refers to people who do not abide by social conventions, it is also one of several Nage usages suggesting a generally negative evaluation of the “seaward, downstream” (lau) direction (Nos. 87, 103, 164, 487). Related to this is a contextual use of lau in the sense of “outside” and of opposite spatial terms (zéle, “up”; zéta, “upstream, landward”) to mean “inside” – as when referring to the innermost part of a house or the interior of a village and, furthermore, all locations outside of Flores (as in lau Kanada, “in Canada”). Similarly, Nage associate the lau direction with witches, the ultimate human outsiders, who, contrary to prescription, are said to sleep with their heads pointing in this direction and to be buried thus (Forth 1993, 101). In addition, many people identified as witches in central Nage appear to derive ultimately from war captives and slaves formerly obtained from northern, and thus seaward, regions. However, in all metaphors where the direction term is linked with an animal, this either has a clear geographical or ecological basis or reflects lau as a reference to an outside or exterior place, thus none actually attests to a symbolic or non-empirical motivation bound up with an association with witches (see chapter 8). 37. Horse follows, Ja dhéko. See Buffalo goes first (No. 8). 38. Horse returning with a trophy head Ja nuka woko Someone who is extremely pleased or joyful, especially after having achieved something or proven victorious An alternative expression is “horse celebrating a head” (ja woko ulu). Woko denotes triumphal cheers uttered by hunters returning with the trophy heads of deer and wild pigs, and in former times with human heads after a military victory. More generally, it refers to celebratory rites performed after to’a lako, the annual collective ritual hunt of pigs and deer, or after a successful war expedition, when the severed head of the leader of the defeated party would be brought into the victors’ village. Commentators, however, described the metaphor as referring specifically to cheers and chants performed in connection with the annual hunt (probably because indigenous warfare and the

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

69

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 70

taking of enemy heads are nowadays things not experienced by anyone still living). At the same time, and as the dual application of woko (or woko ulu; ulu is “head”) should suggest, Nage represent the annual hunt itself as a form of warfare (Forth 2016, 105–6). After a successful hunt, one or more horses are used to carry animal heads, and these always precede the other riders. On their return home (nuka), the men chant and utter cries of exaltation, to which Nage say the horses will always respond by neighing, as it were participating in a celebration of the hunters’ success – possibly a response to either or both the sound of loud human voices or the smell of blood. 39. Horse that accepts a large rice container Ja sawo sa’a A person who is always ready to help, a willing person Sa’a are large plaited baskets in which newly harvested rice is placed for loading onto the backs of horses when transporting the rice from field to village. Besides “accept,” sawo conveys the sense of “to pick up, fetch” and “to be agreeable to, comply with.” The metaphor thus describes a horse that does not object and readily cooperates when a heavy container is placed on its back. 40. Horse that cannot be led Ja kido talo An obstinate or contrary person, someone who is not compliant Kido is “to pull,” and the phrase refers to leading a horse by a rope. The expression is generally synonymous with “horse with a hard neck” (No. 45). 41. Horse that dances to the drum Ja dogo laba Someone too quick to respond to an invitation The expression was explained as describing, more specifically, “a horse that dances as soon as the drum is struck” – or, more exactly, when drums and gongs (laba go) are played since drums and gongs are typically played together. As Nage further point out, horses do not actually dance (prance, cavort) in time to the rhythm of a gong and drum orchestra, or do so only

70

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 71

Figure 3 Horses about to be led to pasture (No. 40)

incidentally. Rather, a horse trained to dance will simply begin moving immediately on hearing the drum. Nage sometimes interpreted the metaphor more specifically as a reference to people who are not especially industrious – particularly in the context of collective labour in cultivated fields or in house construction – but who are always first in line when the call to eat goes out. Nage regard such behaviour as coarse, ill-mannered, and a sign of greed, and people are expected to display reticence and restraint whenever such an invitation is made, regardless of how hungry they might be. 42. Horse that will not stop when one pulls on the reins Ja edo talo A person who cannot be restrained

71

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 72

Denoting someone who in the English metaphor cannot be “reined in,” the metaphor is comparable, although not identical in its reference, to “a horse that cannot be led” (No. 40). 43. Horse wary of ledges Ja taku teda A cautious or hesitant person The metaphor’s specific vehicle is a horse that is descending a slope divided into levels and that hesitates at the edge of each ledge (teda). In regard to both humans and riding horses, Nage mostly regard such caution positively. Although taku more generally means “afraid, frightened, fearful” (cf. Indonesian takut), it is better translated here as “wary.” Much could be written about the Nage use of taku and the mental states it denotes, but it may suffice to note that fear is treated less negatively among Nage than among Westerners. As I have often observed among both Nage and other Flores populations, people are less reluctant to confess to feelings of fear, and saying that one is afraid of doing something is regularly given, and accepted, as sufficient reason for not doing it. 44. Horse whose mane can be stroked, pressed down Ja pou odu A compliant person Usually applied to someone of low status who is easily subordinated, the phrase was explained by commentators as referring specifically to a horse whose mane can be stroked forward, or against the grain. This is something that many horses will resist. 45. Horse with a hard (inflexible) neck Ja tengu dego A person unwilling to comply or who cannot be persuaded Referring to someone who is stubborn or obstinate (or “stone-headed,” ulu watu, as Nage say) the usage is more or less synonymous with “horse that cannot be led” (No. 40). Like this last expression, the metaphor expresses a negative evaluation and is apparently never used in a positive sense – for

72

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 73

example, to refer to a person of firm convictions. Although the Nage metaphor specifically mentions a horse, the expression is otherwise identical to English “hard-necked,” meaning obstinate or inflexible. 46. Horse with a long penis Ja lasu léwa An idle man who roams about aimlessly or without good intention The expression is usually applied disparagingly to young male loafers who wander about in groups. Although described as coarse and, according to some, is never employed by women, in fact I first heard it from a woman. “Long penis” is understood as an erect penis. As several Nage pointed out, when a stallion becomes aroused its penis emerges from the preputial sheath but does not become completely or permanently erect and so will sway up and down or from side to side – like young, idle men wandering hither and yon. As this should suggest, the metaphor is motivated not by the behaviour of aroused stallions but specifically by their penises, and accordingly the expression does not particularly allude to the sexual appetites or exploits of young men. As one man humorously remarked, “the male members of men described as horse with a long penis may be no more than a few centimeters in length and nothing like a stallion’s!” It is also relevant that “penis” (lasu) is commonly used by Nage men as a general term of abuse, often in a semi-humorous way, for other males of about the same age – as for example in the oft-heard kau lasu kau, “you prick,” or kau lasu ema kau, “(you are) your father’s penis.” Comparable usages are of course found in other parts of the world. 47. Horse with a soft (flexible) neck Ja tengu meku A person who is easily led or who too freely cedes to requests Obviously the opposite of “horse with a hard neck” (No. 45), the metaphor expresses the negative quality of readily giving in or, as one man expressed this, being “too willing to compromise.” As one woman explained, people who immediately cede to requests from outsiders may do so without giving sufficient thought to future needs of themselves or their families, or to how they will meet obligations to kin and affines, whose anger they may therefore later incur. On the other hand, the expression sometimes

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

73

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 74

has a positive referent, describing an accommodating person or someone willing to compromise. In either case the metaphor has two possible empirical bases. A horse with a “flexible neck” is one that is easily led or directed, but it is also one that, as one informant explained, “immediately nods” (siba nugu) in agreement. In this second respect, the metaphor is largely synonymous with one incorporating the beetle named muku te’a (No. 523), and in regard to both usages, it should be noted that, among Nage as among Westerners, nodding the head up and down signals agreement, acknowledgment, or understanding, while shaking the head sideways expresses the opposite meaning. Yet another Nage metaphor referring to giving things away too freely is “pissing on stone” (bhia cio tolo watu). As was explained, in this circumstance the urine runs away freely instead of being absorbed, as occurs when urine falls on soil. 48. Horse with its bridle removed Ja lua kume Someone who dives into a meal or who too hastily begins any activity Kume refers more specifically to the “bit” placed in the horse’s mouth, but the phrase generally describes a horse that has had its entire bridle removed after the rider, always a male, has reached his destination. Thus unencumbered, typically a horse will immediately begin to graze, hence the metaphor applies to a person who, on returning home or stopping work, immediately begins eating. As Nage explain, before beginning a meal (e.g., after returning from the fields), a person should relax for a while or clean up and perhaps change dirty clothing. In part, the metaphor is comparable to the English “to eat like a horse,” something that similarly carries a negative connotation. However, the Nage phrase also has the more general reference of someone who is impatient and in too much of a hurry to begin any activity. 49. Stick horse (and) dog adept at climbing, advance together biting (but) return kicking Ja tua lako lebi, kai kiki walo wedhi A person who receives assistance from others but later rejects or treats them badly

74

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 75

In a somewhat more specific interpretation, the metaphor refers to someone who gains the support of an erstwhile adversary in opposing a common foe but, after gaining victory, resumes his or her former dispute. Although the motivation is rather complex, it is nevertheless widely recognized among Nage. “Stick horse” refers to a child’s toy horse made from the branch of an Arenga palm (tua), while “dog adept at climbing” literally denotes a hunting dog that is skilled in ascending and descending inclines (lebi is “slope, hillside”). In one view, both terms can be understood as names given to individual riding horses, but this seems not to be essential to the interpretation. As commentators further remarked, a palm branch hobby horse will swing from side to side potentially striking anyone the rider passes, while similarly, a dog skilled in climbing is likely to collide with slower members of a pack when running up or down a slope. Thus both terms refer to things likely to harm companions. Although naturally denoting a behaviour of hunting dogs, “biting” (kiki, also meaning “to attack or kill with teeth and jaws”) is understood here as meaning hunting (together) and thus as equally applicable to both dogs and horses. On the other hand, “kicking” is obviously specific to horses. The common foes are, of course, game animals. 50. Horse without a stake Ja toka mona A person with too much freedom and who lacks direction Toka denotes a stout stake driven into the ground for tying up animals, especially in treeless areas. Nage understand the expression as pertaining to people who lack guidance, perhaps through no fault of their own, as well as to people who behave irresponsibly, ignoring the instructions or wishes of parents or others in authority. (In the first sense, a comparison may be referring to someone in English as being insufficiently “anchored.”) The metaphor somewhat overlaps with “horse down in the plain” (No. 36), but commentators disagreed about the extent of the difference. 51. Mare that consorts with a younger stallion Ja haki azi A married woman who shows especial affection for a younger brother or other younger male relative of her husband

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

75

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 76

The Nage phrase has two quite different interpretations. In the present instance, haki is construed in the verbal sense of “having (or treating as) a husband,” and its object is a younger male relative (azi). In reference to horses the “husband” is a dominant stallion, the leader of a herd that monopolizes the mares and drives off younger male competitors. As a metaphor for married women, Nage described the expression in ways that implied an excessive fondness or attachment and even an improper relationship (although not necessarily of a sexual kind) between the wife and the husband’s younger sibling. An alternative gloss of exactly the same phrase serves as another metaphor (No. 57). 52. Mottled horse, Ja kéla. See Speckled fowl (No. 281) 53. Pregnant mare Ja kada Someone with a large or swollen belly The expression refers more specifically to people who eat so much their bellies become distended, thus a greedy person. Kada denotes pregnancy specifically in animals. Applied to both men and women, the usual expression is “having a belly like a pregnant horse” (tuka bhia ja kada). 54. Ride a mare Saka ja metu To copulate (of a man), to have sex with a woman The metaphor plays on the double sense of saka, “to ride (a horse)” and “to mount (a female)” in sexual intercourse. The expression is often used sardonically, for example in reference to a man who has likely been engaging a woman in sex, or at any rate is described as having been so engaged, while he should have been doing something else. On one occasion it was directed in jest to me, when one morning I appeared unusually tired; someone observing this then suggested that I had probably spent the night “riding a mare.”

76

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 77

55. Stallion with many mares Ja metu woso A man who has (maintains relationships with) many women Insofar as “women” can mean “wives,” the metaphor is synonymous with No. 56. Denoting “mares,” however, metu should refer more generally to women, so that the phrase would also apply to a man with numerous sexual partners. 56. Wives like a horse Fai ja A man with several wives This is usually expressed as bhia fai ja, “to have wives like a horse,” or fai bhia ja. In both phrases, fai (“wife”) is understood in the verbal sense of “to have a wife, wives.” Another variant, and according to some the most correct, is fai bhia zu ja, roughly “to have wives like driving horses (mares)” (zu, “to drive forward, to herd”; see also ana bue bhia zu ja, “to have numerous girlfriends”). The specific source of the metaphor is stallions typically coupling with multiple mares. Since fai properly denotes a “legitimate” wife, the expression refers to traditional polygyny. But because polygyny is nowadays prohibited among Christian Nage, and therefore generally disapproved, the metaphor is now mostly used as a critical reference to the few men who, although formally converted, continue the practice, taking additional wives with bridewealth or inheriting brothers’ widows. The metaphor provides one of several examples in which a sexual relationship between animals stands for human marriage. 57. Younger brother of a colt Ja haki azi A very small or short man Unlike No. 51 (which is possibly a pun on the present usage), in this interpretation haki is understood in the sense of “young male mammal,” while azi (“younger sibling”) indicates an even younger animal, in this case specifically a stallion. Grammatically, however, the expression is ambiguous and so facilitates the different metaphorical usage described in No. 51.

77

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 78

58. Horse fungus (horse dung fungus) Fako ja (fako ta’i ja) One of several kinds of fungus The fungus (fako) is so named because it is commonly found growing in horse dung. Unlike other fungi, therefore, it is not eaten. 59. Young horse (or “little horse”) beats the drum Ana ja paka laba The sound of distant thunder The expression occurs in a planting song describing the imminent approach of the wet season. Whether “young horse” figures as a definite animal metaphor is however uncertain, and in fact ana ja is sometimes rendered as Ine Jawa, “Mother Jawa” (Forth 2004a, 187). The homonymous ja means “cool, cold,” but it is difficult to see how this might have bearing on the phrase.

CATTLE • Bos spp. • SAPI Known only by the Indonesian name sapi, cattle were introduced to the Nage region early in the twentieth century, during the colonial period. Whenever I asked Nage about metaphors employing cattle, I was always told there were none because cattle were new animals. In the same way, cattle, being still considered foreign, are not employed as bridewealth, although they can be slaughtered in place of water buffalo by wife-takers to provide meals for a bride’s party when the two groups come together to contract a marriage. Subsequently, however, I recorded two cattle metaphors, both described as very recent. These, then, exemplify a new animal giving rise to new metaphors, although since the animal has been present for some considerable time, these seem not to have emerged particularly quickly. 60. Balinese cow or bull Sapi Bali A coarse-mannered and insolent person

78

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 79

The metaphor has its motivation in the unpredictable and sometimes aggressive behaviour of Balinese cattle, domestic descendants of wild banteng (Bos javanicus), specifically in contrast to the characteristically calm and more even-tempered Madura cattle. Whereas Madura cattle were introduced early in the twentieth century, Balinese cattle appeared just a few decades ago and have now almost entirely replaced the Maduras. Before Balinese cattle were introduced cattle were by all indications never used as a metaphor, and it is therefore worth noting that this and the similar metaphor below (No. 61) apparently derive in part from the contrasting temperaments of the two breeds. A more specific variant of the metaphor is “to move like a Balinese cow” (la’a bhia sapi Bali), which refers to people who move quickly and carelessly, not looking where they are going and risking collision with others. 61. Face like a Balinese cow or bull Ngia bhia ngia sapi Bali A person with an angry expression This is also expressed more simply as “like a cow’s face.” One man claimed that both this and the other cow metaphor may be replacing deer metaphors (Nos. 167, 168, both referring specifically to male deer) with regard to what he and others describe as the similar habits of cattle and deer, moving quickly with their heads raised and immediately raising their heads whenever they see a human. He might also have mentioned that cattle are now the more familiar animal, and it would also seem relevant to these comparisons that, for some time, many cattle, and especially Balinese cattle, have become feral and are therefore encountered as “wild” animals. Another man remarked how, when Balinese cattle raise their heads, they appear angry and aggressive but are not necessarily so. Like many animal metaphors, accusing someone of having a cow’s face is a form of abuse and an expression of displeasure or annoyance rather than a reference to the actual appearance or any particular behaviour of the addressee.

SHEEP • Ovis aries • LEBU As sheep are virtually absent from central Nage, largely because they are not well suited to local conditions, the number of metaphors incorporating this

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

79

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 80

Figure 4 Balinese cow (No. 60)

animal is rather surprising. Sheep, however, are numerous in the north coastal region of Mbai and occur sporadically in areas further inland. And since, through marriage and otherwise, central Nage have maintained relations with Mbai and other more northerly regions, it is likely that these metaphors derive from places to the north. Sheep have come to be used occasionally in central Nage as bridewealth, in which context they are conceived as substitutes for goats, and their flesh is rated higher than goat meat. In a comparative perspective, it is interesting that all Nage sheep metaphors have a negative human referent and, moreover, that the English use of “sheep” for a timid person finds no echo in Nage usage. Curiously, the word for “sheep”

80

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 81

in Nage and other parts of Flores is related to Malay and Indonesian lembu, which denotes cattle (Forth 2016, 83). 62. Ram’s horn Tadu lebu A devious person Usually expressed as “like a ram’s horn” (bhia tadu lebu), the metaphor reflects the fact that rams’ horns are not straight but twist and curl. As in English, this and other Nage animal metaphors reveal the widespread conceptual metaphor whereby “straight” and “not straight” stand for moral virtue and its opposite (see Nos. 144, 206 regarding cat’s and civet’s tails). 63. Ram that strikes everything with its horns Lebu tolo degu An indiscriminate person Although lebu names sheep in general, Nage understand the phrase as describing a ram. A major reference is a man who is undiscriminating in sexual relations, not distinguishing between women who are permitted and prohibited (mona be’o pie zi’a). However, Nage also apply the metaphor to people who are undiscriminating in other ways, including someone who is generally intolerant of others. 64. Sheep (singular or plural) Lebu A person who heedlessly intrudes, passing between or among two or more people without caution or proper respect Usually expressed as bhia ko’o lebu lebu, “like sheep,” lebu is often reduplicated and in this case refers to several animals. According to Nage, the metaphor reflects the image of a flock of sheep mindlessly pushing forward regardless of what might lie ahead of them. A common English metaphor, of course, builds on the same ovine behaviour. A variant metaphor is la’a loza bhia ko lebu, “to move, wander like (a) sheep,” also referring to people, including children, who walk without looking where they are going and perhaps bump into other people.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

81

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 82

65. Sheep of Kebi, Kebi sheep Lebu Kebi A person from Kebi This is a retaliatory deprecation applied by ‘Ua people to residents of neighbouring Kebi, especially in response to the latter calling them ‘Ua goats (No. 73), and depicting Kebi folk as no more sophisticated than ‘Ua people. How far prosodic considerations affect this expression is moot as the metaphor’s major motivation is evidently the morphological and behavioural resemblance between sheep and goats and their generally close association in Nage representations generally. 66. Sheep’s diarrhea Loga lebu A very dirty or untidy person Sheep’s diarrhea is described as especially messy, smelly, and sticking to the body. Apparently it is this third characteristic, connected with the thick wool of sheep, that distinguishes the loose stools of this animal from those of others, so the metaphor evidently reveals the same motivation as “sheep’s placenta” (No. 67). 67. Sheep’s placenta Bau lebu A person dressed in dirty, shabby, or ill-fitting clothes, or someone who wears too many clothes A more elaborate expression of the same metaphor is sada hoba bhia ko bau lebu, “(to have) clothes like a sheep placenta.” According to an especially cogent local exegesis, when ewes give birth the placenta sticks to their long, thick wool and can thus remain hanging for some time. By contrast, the hair of goats, buffalo, and other animals is not nearly as thick so the placenta does not so readily adhere to the mother’s body. According to another interpretation, sheep’s placentae are bulky or “too large” (apparently in relation to foetuses) and are “wet, untidy, and dirty,” again by contrast to those of other animals. In regard to ill-fitting clothing that hangs loose on the body, a person

82

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 83

may be specifically described, for example, as “wearing a waistcloth or sarong (tubular garments worn by both men and women) like a sheep’s placenta” (tago hoba bhia bau lebu). As one man remarked, people who wear (too) many clothes – or are “bundled up” – may do so because they feel cold, especially early in the morning, or because they are unwell. Bau, “placenta,” is synonymous with funi, a term appearing in other animal metaphors. The more complete form is funi bau.

GOAT • Capra hirca • ‘USA (dialectal rusa) A Nage association of goats with deer is evidenced in the fact that the name ‘usa (or rusa) reflects a widespread term for deer in Malayo-Polynesian languages. This would indicate that deer preceded goats on Flores (Forth 2012a), but how long either animal has been present on the island remains unclear. The scant zooarchaeological evidence available for Flores reveals a date not earlier than four hundred years ago (Van den Bergh et al. 2009), but other evidence indicates the presence of both goats and deer in other parts of eastern Indonesia at far earlier dates (Forth 2016, 85). Although the comparative evidence from cultural uses of other animals is mixed, the occurrence of “goat” in three metaphorical names for plants (Nos. 81–3), a conventional association with dogs (No. 84), and a regular use of goats as bridewealth (Forth 2016, 141) could also indicate that Nage have been familiar with goats for some considerable time. 68. Bleating goats that hear one another, crowing cocks that answer one another ‘Usa bhe papa léle, manu kako papa walo People who live in adjoining villages This parallelistic expression describes two villages located so close to one another that, when the goats or cocks of one vocalize, those in the neighbouring settlement hear their cries and respond. Heard most often as part of formal declarations and in the recounting of clan and village histories, the phrases apply where people of one village have ceded part of their lands to immigrants, who then built a separate village close to that of the longer-established

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

83

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 84

group (Forth 2005). At the same time, the animal metaphors refer to human inhabitants of the two villages themselves and their obligation, as close neighbours, to provide mutual assistance, or to respond to (or “hear” and “answer”) one another’s needs. Cocks and goats are evidently employed because, apart from dogs, these are the animals most often kept inside or near villages and whose cries carry far. 69. Female goat butting, butting of female goats Puku ‘usa metu Someone who speaks thoughtlessly and in a way likely to cause trouble The phrase alludes to female goats, apparently unlike male goats, butting arbitrarily and thus ineffectually – the blows not hitting their mark and striking unintended targets. Accordingly, the metaphor refers to thoughtless speech that is tactless or, as one commentator put it, does not take account of people’s feelings. In one view it applies especially to women’s gossip, but the metaphor can refer to the speech of men as well. 70. Goat droppings Ta’i ‘usa A group whose members are residentially scattered or lack unity or solidarity The contrasting condition is “buffalo dung” (No. 6). The physical separation of people who are residentially dispersed directly parallels the excrement of goats, which – unlike the dung of water buffaloes – comprises small, relatively hard pellets that scatter some distance when they hit the ground. 71. Goat(s) in undergrowth, pig(s) rooting in vines ‘Usa ‘ubu, wawi koba A couple engaging in a clandestine affair or illicit sex Composing another standard parallelism, the phrases describe goats and pigs rooting about in wild vegetation outside (although possibly not too distant from) human settlements. This is one of several conventional metaphors expressing a Nage representation, and a more general conceptual metaphor, whereby illicit liaisons – relationships that do not involve a public agreement between two groups and are not contracted with an exchange of valuables –

84

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 85

are identified with sex acts performed outside of houses or settlements or, in other words, beyond the bounds of approved social order. At the same time, the forest (or “bush”) is in fact where encounters between people engaging in clandestine sexual relationships often do take place, among Nage as in many other societies. Additional metaphors alluding to the social and symbolic exteriority of illicit sex include standard references to the acts as taking place “in the middle of the forest, on the tips of wild plants” (kisa witu, lobo bene); “among trees, in rock crevices” (pu’u kaju, lia watu); and “in the middle of a journey, some way along a path” (kisa wesa, mata zala).1 The expression ‘usa ‘ubu wawi koba is considered quite coarse, partly because it can include forced sex or rape (poto péwu) rather than simply referring to people who engage in non-marital sex. The selection of goats and pigs as the vehicles of the metaphor possibly reflects the practice of keeping these animals close to villages, in contrast to buffalo and horses, which traditionally were released to roam free in “the plain” (see No. 36). On the other hand, whether this metaphorical use of goats instances a more widespread view of male goats as especially or excessively sexual creatures – as in the English metaphor “old goat,” referring to a (usually elderly) lecherous man (see Ammer 1989, 67, who gives “goat, goatish” as a reference to a “licentious or lecherous” male, man or boy) – is moot (see No. 80). Although “goat” and “pig” are usually not understood as distinguishing male and female participants in illicit relationships, pigs are associated with women in other contexts, for example as animals that accompany a bride as a major part of a wifegiver’s counter-gift, while goats are one of several kinds of animals used as bridewealth. Children of illicit sexual relationships can be identified as “offspring of goats in undergrowth …,” ana ‘usa ‘ubu, wawi koba, simply as ana ‘usa ‘ubu, or alternatively as “children of wild pigs” (No.120). In this last context, Nage identify the source as wild boars that mate with domestic sows. 72. Goat(s) jumping on companions ‘Usa dhoko moko A boisterous child, children creating a disturbance Moko means “friend, companion,” usually someone of the same sex. The metaphor involves a comparison of noisy, boisterous children with the habit of goats jumping on the backs of other goats, both males and females indiscriminately. The reference thus overlaps with that of “uncastrated goat” (No.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

85

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 86

80), and even though dhoko can mean “to mount (in sexual intercourse)” the expression does not refer to human sexual activity. As regards the animal behaviour that provides its vehicle, the Nage metaphor finds a noteworthy parallel in the ultimate derivation from Latin caper, “goat,” of the English verb “caper,” an abbreviation of “capriole,” meaning “to frolic, jump or prance about” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary). 73. Goat of ‘Ua, ‘Ua goat ‘Usa ‘Ua A person from the ‘Ua region; an unrefined, undiscriminating person Used by the people of Kebi, this is a derogatory expression addressed to the neighbouring ‘Ua people who, throughout central Nage, have a reputation for being coarse, dirty, and unsophisticated and having little respect for others. Commentators identified the metaphor’s specific source as an unruly goat that leaps hither and yon, enters cultivated fields, and causes damage. To this ‘Ua people may respond, “well, you are a Kebi sheep” (No. 65). Situated relatively high on the slopes of the Ebu Lobo volcano, ‘Ua was formerly home to a population of feral goats (Forth 2016, 84–5); however, the selection of “goat,” ‘usa, to represent ‘Ua people is in part evidently motivated by prosody. As used by other central Nage, the entire expression ‘usa ‘Ua, lebu Kebi (sometimes abbreviated as ‘usa Kebi, “Kebi goat”) lumps the two regions together, in reference either to people of these regions or, more generally, to people deemed to match their uncultured stereotype, and may refer especially to undiscriminating eaters, who by the same token may be judged as greedy or gluttonous. In this respect, the motivation for the metaphor was identified as the voracious feeding habits of goats and sheep and their tendency to overgraze, to the ruination of pasture. As in other Nage usages, the metaphor – or paired metaphors – turns on the similarity of goats and sheep and in this respect contrasts to the biblically derived English metaphor “separating the sheep from the goats” (Matthew 25, 31–46), which of course alludes to a fundamental difference. 74. Goat on one hill, dog on another (hill) ‘Usa sa wolo, lako sa wolo People who speak at cross purposes, someone who misses the point

86

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 87

Figure 5 Goat on a rock (No. 74)

When applied to an individual, the expression describes someone who, misunderstanding what another is saying, starts talking about something else or responds to another topic. The use of two different locations, specifically two different hills, is somewhat reminiscent of the modern English metaphor “not being on the same page,” although the Nage usage further expresses the disparity by reference to two different animals. The combination of “goat” and “dog” reflects the standard composite ‘usa lako, a category of Nage special-purpose classification denoting smaller domestic animals given by wife-takers to wife-givers on various occasions of affinal exchange (Forth 2016, 141).

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

87

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 88

75. Goat on the mountain side ‘Usa zéle lobo Someone or something that distracts a person’s attention Lobo refers to the Ebu Lobo volcano, whose higher slopes, as noted, was formerly home to a population of feral goats (see No. 73). Even so, seeing a goat on a mountainside in Nage territory has probably never been a particularly common experience. In other contexts, zéle lobo (“on the mountain”; where lobo has more the meaning of “peak” or “summit”) somewhat opaquely refers to an impotent man, but this appears irrelevant to the present metaphor. As “goat on the mountain” denotes a distraction or diversion – someone or something that draws one’s attention away from a task or topic of conversation, as the local interpretation has it – it recalls the English metaphor “red herring,” although this can refer more specifically to a deliberate diversion (see Ammer 1989, 228; Palmatier 1995, 319). 76. Goats eating (voraciously) until sunset ‘Usa sepa leza mena People working quickly and continuously to finish a task on time Often used as an exhortation, to encourage a group of people collectively engaged in agricultural labour to complete a task before nightfall, the expression draws on a practice of penning goats in the morning and returning the animals to their pens at sundown. This is done especially in cooler and damper parts of central Nage since, as Nage recognize, goats do not tolerate cold and moisture. Having built up an appetite in the mornings, goats released and taken to pasture after midday will then eat voraciously and without stop until sundown – as one man put it “as if they know that they will be penned again before nightfall.” Mena is the direction to the right of a central point of orientation (Forth 1991), but as this is generally to the west in central Nage, leza mena refers to the direction of the sunset. 77. Goat that enters a village ‘Usa kono bo’a Someone in an unfamiliar place or situation who does not know where to turn

88

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 89

The metaphor apparently reflects borrowing from the Indonesian idiom rusa masuk kampong, “a deer that enters a village” and reflects a misidentification of central Nage ‘usa (rusa in dialects to the northeast), “goat,” and rusa, the term for deer in the national language. One man described the expression as referring to a person who enters a village and speaks forcefully or loudly, but this appears not to be the general understanding (see No. 166). 78. Goat’s whiskers, sideburns Kumi ‘usa Men’s facial hair The usual expression is “having side whiskers, facial hair like a goat” (kumi bhia ko’o kumi ‘usa). At present, kumi is generally understood as equivalent to Indonesian kumis, “moustache,” in which regard one Nage man described the metaphor as curious “because goats do not have moustaches (kumi) but only beards (tébe).” His puzzlement apparently reflects both influence from the national language and changing hair-styles. Growing moustaches but shaving the rest of the face is a modern practice; formerly, when hair above the lip was regarded simply as part of a beard, there seems not to have been any separate word for “moustache.” A term specifying side whiskers or sideburns is accordingly kumi pipi (pipi, “cheek”), and Arndt (1961) glosses Ngadha kumi as “beard, moustache, facial hair.” 79. Male goat mounting a female goat ‘Usa dhoko moka A clumsy person, who bumps or rams into things or other people Moka is a young female animal that is full grown or approaching maturity but has yet to bear offspring. Recorded just once, a regular informant claimed the expression was the correct or original form of ‘usa dhoko moko, “goat jumping on companions” (No. 72), and he identified the motivation as a male goat’s habit, when driven by excessive sexual appetite, of mating in a rambunctious, disorderly way, attempting to mount a female from various directions. Again, however, although the specific zoological source is the sexuality of billy goats, the expression does not refer to sexual behavior in humans, and it is not clear how far it should be treated as a separate metaphor or a variant of ‘usa dhoko

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

89

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 90

moko. (Dhoko is synonymous with gaka, “to mount, mate,” specifically with reference to large mammals or livestock.) 80. Uncastrated goat ‘Usa mona keso An overactive or restless person Also recorded as “(having) a body like an uncastrated goat” (weki bhia ‘usa mona kesi), the expression usually describes people who are never still, who are always getting up, changing place, and moving about, and who thus disturb others. It can also refer to people who regularly change what they are doing or who do not stick to a decision and appear to lack conviction. Although the usage reflects the sexual behaviour of male goats that are still whole, it does not apply specifically or even usually to men who wander about in search of women and, in fact, is one of many phrases Nage parents use when reprimanding boisterous young children. 81. Goat’s beard Tébe ‘ongo A kind of fungus The name is peculiar, as ‘ongo (goat) is the Nage form of rongo, the name for goats in Ngadha and some Lio dialects (see also central Keo longo, western Keo yongo). 82. Goat’s ear Hinga ‘ongo A kind of brownish fungus The fungus is named after its fancied resemblance to a goat’s ear. Regarding ‘ongo see No. 81. 83. Goat testicle lemon Mude ‘ade ‘usa A variety of citrus The plant is so named because the fruit are about the same size as a goat’s testicles (cf. buffalo testicle lemon, No. 28). 90

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 91

DOG • Canis familiaris • LAKO Dogs are among the earliest animals brought to Flores and their significance in Nage life is manifold (Forth 2016, 86–92), so it is hardly surprising that among mammals the dog is the vehicle of the highest number of metaphors (35), exceeding even the water buffalo (33). In regard to relations with and especially treatment by humans, a difference is noticeable between more highly valued hunting dogs and ordinary dogs, but this contrast is not discernible in most Nage dog metaphors. 84. Barking like a dog Gho gho bhia ko’o lako ghogho A person with a harsh voice and who speaks a lot The expression translates more exactly as “to make sounds like a barking dog,” or “to go ‘bow-wow’ (gho gho).” Insofar as it refers not only to a harshvoiced person who speaks often but also such a person who speaks loudly, the usage is comparable to English metaphors like “barking orders” and “barking obscenities.” In English, “barking like a dog” can also describe someone with a loud, persistent cough. 85. Dog adept at climbing, Lako lebi. See Stick horse (No. 49) 86. Dog (and) pig Lako wawi A person who behaves like an animal, in an improper or immoral way Combining the name of a ubiquitous domestic animal and “pig,” which names both wild and domestic swine, lako wawi is a standard binary composite with several senses, the most inclusive being “mammals in general” (Forth 2016, 141). As a metaphor, it further suggests “animals in general.” Recorded instances include the admonition “do not be, behave like dogs [and] pigs” (ma’e bhia lako wawi) and “to have the nature of a dog [and] pig” (ngai zede bhia ko’o lako wawi). As regards this second usage it should be noted that Nage normally consider ngai zede (here glossed as “nature” but also interpretable as “mind”) as a quality exclusive to humans and do not employ the term when speaking of the characteristic ways of non-human animals. In referring metaphorically to animal-like behaviour Nage also employ other standard D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

91

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 92

binary composites conjoining animal names, specifically names of wild animals and nearly all denoting mammals, either in place of or as complements to lako wawi (pig [and] dog). These include: kogha wawi, “deer [and] wild pigs”; kutu bétu, “porcupine [and] Giant rat”; bheku meo, “civet [and] cat”; and ‘o’a ghoa, “monkey [and] monitor lizard” (see further Forth 2016, 140–8). 87. Dog from Labo Lako Labo A wife taken from a distant location or unfamiliar group Labo (or “Lambo”) is a district far to the northeast of central Nage, which, in this context, refers synecdochically to any distant region. The phrase is contained in a longer aphoristic expression, “purchase a dog from Labo and gunpowder will be wasted; command it to go home and it will run seawards (that is, in the opposite direction),” beta lako Labo tau loja ao, zuba nai nuka pau so (or dua) lau. Usually sung while circle-dancing, the phrases are a warning of the dangers of marrying a woman from a distant place or from a relatively unknown group as she may prove not to perform wifely duties properly. Nage commentators interpreted “wasted gunpowder” as bridewealth that is expended in vain, in which respect it is noteworthy that taking a wife from an unrelated group typically requires a higher bridewealth. As Labo is seaward (lau) of central Nage, pau so lau refers to the wife running home to her parents. Although interpretable as a synecdoche, “Labo” is probably further motivated by its assonance with lako (dog). Although dogs are one of the animals included in bridewealth (and thus given in exchange for wives), women are not generally identified symbolically with dogs, and in this context “dog” is evidently chosen as an animal trained to follow its owner’s commands. As Nage pointed out, dogs, and especially adult dogs, purchased from distant places or unfamiliar people may not have been well trained. 88. Dog has carried (something) away, carried away by a dog Lako padho A person inspired to do wrong, someone who is led astray The metaphor occurs as one of a pair of parallel phrases, polo péte, lako padho, “a witch has pointed the way; a dog has carried (something) away,” or “di-

92

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 93

rected by a witch, carried off by a dog.” The referent is someone who is influenced by others to commit wrong-doing, and the phrase is often used when admonishing another person not to follow the speaker’s example in reference to behaviour he or she now regrets. According to Nage, the metaphor derives from a dog’s habit of picking up things with its mouth and dropping or depositing these some distance away. It is the person influenced by negative forces – or (as one might say in English) led astray – who is thus described as being “carried off ” by a dog.” The parallelism of “witch” and “dog” in the longer expression may reflect a wider association of dogs and witches (polo), a connection consistent with the animal’s quasi-human status (Forth 2016, 88–90). At the same time, Nage identify witches with animals in general (Forth 1993; Forth 1998; Forth 2007a), and witches are not especially associated with dogs in the way European witches are associated with cats. In addition, the reference to a “witch” in the longer expression is equally figurative. A person exerting such negative influence is not actually identified as a witch, and the expression does not constitute an accusation of witchcraft, even indirectly. 89. Dog hiding at the edge of a path Lako buni dhi zala A person unable to conceal a meaning or intention A more complete form of the expression is pata bhia lako buni dhi zala, describing what a person says (pata) as “being like a dog hiding at the edge of a path.” Nage understand the phrase as referring more specifically to a dog sticking its head into vegetation growing beside a path – as dogs often do, when looking or sniffing for something – so that most of its body remains visible. The human referent, therefore, is someone who deliberately speaks unclearly or opaquely but nevertheless fails to conceal something that is evident to interlocutors or of which they are already aware. 90. Dog in need of a bone Lako no’a toko A person who keeps requesting something and persists even after several refusals No’a means “to require or want something (urgently),” like a small child who wants to be suckled or fed (to cite an example given by one commentator).

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

93

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 94

However, in this metaphor the word may partly be understood as involving a pun on noa, “to howl, wail” – as dogs also characteristically do. And it is interesting that, when applied to humans, noa refers especially to the crying or wailing of small children who, as in the above illustration, may vocalize in this way owing to hunger. 91. Dog mounting a buffalo Lako saka bhada A man of low rank who marries or cohabits with a woman of higher rank See “buffalo mounting a dog” (No. 10), describing the opposite relationship. Especially in the traditional society, the relationship is less likely to involve regular cohabitation and, thus, more likely to be less public or more clandestine than where a union involves a high-ranking man and a low-ranking woman. 92. Dog on another hill, Lako sa wolo. See Goat on one hill (No. 74) 93. Dog pissing at the edge of a path Lako suka dhi zala A person who does something inconstantly and ineffectually The metaphor refers more specifically to someone who begins something but is regularly distracted by other matters, keeps stopping to do other things, or does not proceed directly to a destination. As a result, the objective is not quickly achieved nor a task easily completed. Nage identify the motivation as the habit of dogs, as they go along, regularly stopping to urinate. A less explicit variant is lako suka téki, “dog that lifts its leg to urinate.” The expression is reminiscent of the English idiom “to piss about,” which appears to have much the same human referent although not clearly the same motivation. 94. Dog rubbing its arse Lako ‘oco ‘obo A person who does not remain long in a single place, who moves from house to house, or cannot sit still and keeps shifting about

94

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 95

The motivation of this metaphor is the practice of dogs rubbing their backsides on the ground or a house floor in order to relieve itching. Nage say dogs will do this in response to worm infestation, in which regard the action draws some sympathy. However, there is also an idea that the canine behaviour is inauspicious (pie) when it occurs close to where people regularly sit, in which case it should be counteracted or prevented by pouring lime on the spot. 95. Dog snatching coconut dregs Lako ca’o pe’a A person who misinterprets what one is saying People thus described might misinterpret or fail to understand other people’s statements because they do not listen properly or do not fully hear the speaker out. They therefore form an interpretation too hastily and “jump” to the wrong conclusion. The source of the metaphor is a dog catching coconut dregs in its jaws when a cook (usually a woman) throws these away after grating and squeezing out the flesh of the nut to extract the cream. As coconut cream is a common ingredient in Nage cooking, grating coconuts and squeezing the flesh are early stages of meal preparation. Although no commentator mentioned this, it would therefore seem that anyone, or any creature, who caught and consumed the dregs – matter of little worth – would not only be ingesting an inferior food but would, as it were, also be eating too hastily, long before the complete meal was fully prepared. Hence it is reasonable to surmise that, in this metaphor, consuming dregs, as a symbol of too hastily and thus improperly interpreting a person’s words, operates in implicit contrast to consuming a fully cooked meal. On the other hand, the contrast may simply be between discarded scraps and the complete meal, where the latter stands for the full statement that is neither heard nor properly comprehended. 96. Dog that bites everyone it encounters Lako kiki papa tuli A person angry with many people Tuli means “to drop in (on someone)” or “to stop by,” while commentators glossed papa tuli as “going to visit someone but dropping in on others along the way.” As papa can mean “side, direction,” here it may have the sense of

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

95

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 96

“on all sides.” Describing a dog that bites one victim after another, the metaphor refers to someone who is rightfully angry with a particular person but, unreasonably, vents anger on everyone he or she comes across. 97. Dog that falls together with the mortar Lako boka toto ngesu A childless person or couple Mortars are used to pound rice and maize, and when a residue of food remains inside, an unwatched dog may climb onto or into a mortar to lap this up. In the scenario described, however, the animal succeeds only in knocking the mortar over and falling with it. Although Nage never commented on the motivation, I suspect the metaphor entails sexual imagery, wherein either the hungry dog and the mortar both evoke the male penis (since both fail to remain standing) or the mortar represents the female genitalia. In other words, the expression may imply failure to engage in fertile intercourse. 98. Dog that is tame with everyone Lako tolo mau A compliant or extremely (or excessively) obliging person The metaphor is employed in at least two similar ways. It can refer to people who are friendly with everyone they meet in order to obtain favourable treatment or something they want or, alternatively, to people with little will or mind of their own who always do what others ask – including women who freely engage in sex with any interested male. Applied mostly to animals, mau means “tame” in regard to specimens of feral animals (e.g., buffalo or cattle) that are tamed for domestic use and ultimately for sale or slaughter, or to wild animals kept as pets. 99. Dog tooth Usu lako Human canine teeth As “canine” is “dog, doglike,” this is identical to the English metaphor. However, English “canine” can refer to the corresponding teeth in a variety of animals, whereas Nage employ usu lako only for humans – and of course dogs.

96

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 97

Interestingly, with reference to porcupines the same term refers to the animal’s quills, its primary defensive equipment and in this respect comparable to a dog’s canines. 100. Dog waiting for bones Lako no toko Someone who remains still, does not take action No in this context means “to wait, remain still” or, more specifically, “to wait in anticipation (of something)”; other meanings include “to coax or persuade” and “angry, annoyed” (probably a homonym). The phrase describes the manner of dogs, especially favoured dogs allowed inside houses, that typically wait patiently for humans eating meat to toss them scraps. In one instance, the metaphor was applied to a creditor waiting to be repaid, and in a similar vein it can refer to visitors who linger and stay beyond their time. But the more general reference is any situation in which a person might be expected to take action or respond to something but in fact does nothing. The metaphor does not definitely refer to patience as a positive human quality. 101. Dogs and cats Lako ne’e meo People who characteristically do not get along and are inclined to quarrel The phrase is virtually identical to English “cats and dogs” in the phrase “to fight like cats and dogs.” It reflects, of course, people’s experience of the mutual dislike that characterizes these two animals that commonly come into contact and sometimes conflict in or near dwellings. As a standard composite, lako meo (or sometimes meo lako) refers to animals that have regular access to the inside of houses – for example, in regard to the requirement that, when a corpse awaits burial inside a house, special care should be taken to ensure that no animal jumps over it (Forth and Kukharenko 2012). 102. Dogs barking at a monkey Lako ghogho ’o’a A number of people speaking against or angry with an individual

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

97

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 98

The specific source of this metaphor is a treed macaque pursued by a pack of hunting dogs. 103. Downstream dog Lako lau An undependable or unpredictable person The usage is generally comparable to “dog from Labo” (No. 87). It occurs in two longer expressions – be’o mau lako lau, “beware the tameness of downstream dogs,” and podi mau lako lau, “pretending to be tame (like a) downstream dog” – both of which suggest prosodic effects. Mau is “tame,” while lau (downstream, seaward) refers to any relatively distant place. As Nage explain, motivating the metaphor is the possibility that a dog acquired from a far away village, although it appears tame and even if it has lived with the new owner for some time, might yet suddenly run away and return to its original owner. In a specific interpretation, the expression refers to a woman who appears “tame,” or well-behaved, at home but misbehaves sexually when she is elsewhere. According to Nage, this is a danger in marrying women whose background is not well known. 104. Howling dog Lako ta’a noa A child who cries loudly and incessantly Often uttered in exasperation and employed in chastising noisy children, “like a howling (or wailing) dog” (bhia lako ta’a noa) is one of several metaphors referring to animal sounds that Nage employ for children crying. As applied to human vocalizations, English “howl” is a comparable usage. Among Nage, however, dogs howling are a death omen, so that children making such a noise may be experienced as particularly disturbing. 105. Hunting dog Lako ngeli Someone distinguished by special qualities or abilities, a superior person The metaphor is alternatively expressed as “descendant of a hunting dog” (dhi lako ngeli) and implicitly involves the previously mentioned contrast be-

98

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 99

tween hunting dogs and non-hunters. Hunting dogs of course possess valued skills that other dogs do not and so are accorded special treatment (Forth 2016, 86–9). 106. Manner of dogs Sa lako The canine position Denoting a human sexual position, the metaphor differs not at all from English “canine position.”

Figure 6 Newly acquired dog, chained (No. 103)

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

99

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 100

107. Nage dog Lako Nage A man with an excessive sexual appetite or one who is adept at persuading women to have sex The phrase refers to Nage men in general, especially when alluding to a particular reputation bound up with a traditional practice of engaging in non-marital (pre- or extra-marital) affairs (Forth 2004b). One commentator thus identified the source of the metaphor as “(male) dogs seeking intercourse” (lako ta’a cu). Relating more specifically to men in the vicinity of Bo’a Wae, the main village in central Nage, the reputation is sometimes advertised by Nage men themselves, and often with some self-satisfaction or pride. I once asked a man whether it was true, as I had heard, that he had two “wives” – that is, that he simultaneously cohabited with two women (or had done so until recently, before one had left him). He confessed to this, adding with a grin, “you know us Nage dogs.” During my most recent visit to Flores in 2018, I heard that young men in central Nage sometimes formed named “gangs” – evidently a modern phenomenon – and that one of these calls itself “Lako Nage.” The Nage usage exemplifies an apparently widespread association of dogs, and not just male dogs (see English “bitch” and “dog in heat”), with sexuality or strong sexual desire. Examples from American English are mentioned in chapter 2. On the other hand, it is possible that the Nage metaphor also draws on the use of dogs in hunting, where they run down and attack game animals (notably deer and pigs). Nage versions of the conceptual metaphors “sexual exploits = hunting” and “women = game animals” are further discussed below, in reference to one of the pig metaphors (No. 125). 108. Swarmed by barking dogs Lako ghogho gheo A person of whom many requests are made or against whom many claims are laid “Barking dogs” refers to the many people who place demands on a person. Despite its generally negative implication, as one commentator pointed out the expression can have a partly positive sense, referring to someone who is much in demand or who bears many responsibilities.

100

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 101

109. Waist like a dog shitting ‘Ége bhia ko’o lako ta’i A person bending over to lift a heavy object As Nage remarked, someone thus engaged is likely to strain at the waist and so in this respect resembles a defecating dog. Addressed to the person lifting, the expression is usually uttered in jest. 110. Sky dog Lako lizu Mole-cricket; night-heron This is a folk taxonomic name with two distinct referents. In regard to the mole-cricket, an insect belonging to the Gryllotalpidae and the more usual referent in central Nage, a comparable metaphoric name is Indonesian anjing tanah (“earth dog”), denoting the same creature. In both languages, “dog” apparently refers to the mole-cricket’s habit of burrowing, or digging holes in the earth. As applied to the night-heron Nycticorax sp. the term alludes to the bird’s harsh cry, resembling the barking of a dog and often heard at night. (Translating as “night raven,” Latin Nycticorax reflects a further resemblance of the heron’s cries to the croaking of a raven.) Identified as “sky dog,” the nocturnal vocalization of the night-heron heard around October is one of a number of chronological signs indicating the onset of the rainy season. Thus when they hear the bird’s cries, Nage say “sky dog looks after the rain” (lako lizu léghu ae uza, Forth 2004a, 12). In this context, the cries are further identified with another bird, the white-breasted waterhen, which is otherwise named kuku raku (see Nos. 416, 417). 111. Surveying dog Lako lao A kind of mantis This is another folk taxonomic name. Lao means “to inspect, check on, look over,” as in lao tana watu, “to look over, survey an area of land or cultivated field,” and lao ana wa, “to check on (domestic) animals, livestock.” But how exactly this pertains to the insect is uncertain.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

101

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 102

112. Dog chest plant Uta kasa lako A parasitic plant An unidentified plant described as growing on tree trunks. Uta is “vegetable, herb.” 113. Dog ginger Lea lako A kind of ginger plant This is one of three kinds of ginger distinguished by animal names (see Nos. 26, 290). By contrast to these other varieties, only the leaves are eaten and not the root. Whether this distinction motivates the name is unclear. 114. Dog’s tail Éko lako A kind of plant A lowland plant with very small flowers, the fruit (which are not eaten) resemble a dog’s tail. For eastern Ngadha, Verheijen (1990) gives the same phrase as the name of Mallotus ricinoides, and for the So’a language, Macaranga sp. 115. Dog’s urine, dog urinating Suka lako A kind of tree This is a tree whose fruit children like to squeeze; the fruit then squirts a small amount of juice reminiscent of the small amount of urine dogs emit whenever they urinate. The tree’s name thus reflects the same motivation as “dog pissing at the edge of a path” (No. 93) and does not refer to the colour or smell of the juice or any part of the tree. 116. Dog’s “elbow” Ciku lako Wood that is bent or warped

102

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 103

Referring also to the human elbow, ciku applies to the heel of a dog’s hind leg. The usage is reminiscent of the English metaphor “bent (or crooked) as a dog’s hind leg,” although the referent of this phrase is usually not physical. 117. Dog’s tongue Lema lako A length of cloth left hanging down from the centre of the abdomen when a man’s waistcloth (or sarong, a sort of tubular skirt) is folded around the body and tucked in at the waist That the tongue hangs from the mouth more often in canines than in other animals explains why the dog in particular provides the vehicle for this metaphor. 118. Sitting dog (hut) (Kéka) lako ngabe A kind of building A structure used for storage or as a temporary shelter (e.g., when guarding fields), constructed of two front posts and two shorter back posts, thus with a diagonal thatched roof sloping towards the back and reminiscent of a dog sitting on its hind legs.

PIG • Sus spp. • WAWI Wawi names both domestic and wild pigs, and Nage regard these (correctly, in an international scientific view) as essentially the same animal and as able to mate and interbreed (Forth 2016, 92–8). Accordingly, the following includes metaphors whose vehicle is either the wild or domestic animal, with the distinction, where relevant, being noted in individual commentaries. In view of the value pigs of both sorts hold for Nage – as major sacrificial animals and as counter-gift given in exchange for bridewealth in the case of domestic swine, and as a major game animal in the case of wild pigs – the number of pig metaphors is perhaps fewer than might be expected. Although twenty-five metaphors are recorded below, just sixteen refer to humans or

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

103

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 104

human behaviour (or in one case, a human body part), the others designating animals, plants, and objects. Several metaphorical uses of the pig – including “stupid as a pig” – have much in common with English pig metaphors (see especially Lawrence 1993). Not always does this amount to a complete identity, yet in view of differences between the role of pigs in Nage and anglophone culture, these similarities are striking and tend to suggest that cross-culturally similar metaphors can be motivated by inherent qualities of pigs as much as by, and sometimes more than, similar socio-economic or cultural values. At the same time, it is noteworthy that, unlike Westerners, Nage do not depict pigs as especially dirty animals, a status arguably accorded more to sheep (see Nos. 66, 67), and the only pig metaphor that mentions faeces (No. 131) – ironically in a crosscultural perspective – actually refers to human excrement. 119. Child of a village (domestic) pig, domestic piglet Ana wawi bo’a A man’s legitimate child Contrasting with “child of a wild pig” (No. 120), the metaphor is synonymous with ana au lewu, “children beneath the (raised) house, housefloor” – a place where, traditionally, domestic pigs were in fact often found. Like other metaphors (e.g. Nos. 71, 129) the expression reflects a general Nage representation of licit and illicit sex, or sex inside and outside marriage, as being prosecuted, respectively inside and outside dwellings or settlements. 120. Child of a wild pig, wild piglet Ana wawi witu An illegitimate child, child born outside of a recognized marriage Such children are more directly designated as ana loza, literally a “child of wandering (loza, ‘to travel, travel about without any definite destination or purpose’),” an expression alluding to the relationship between the child and the father (the “wanderer”). The same applies to the present metaphor, the interpretation of which thus agrees with the use of “wild pig” (No. 134) for a man who travels far and wide. A modern expression for an illegitimate child is “aeroplane child” (ana kapa co), although this may allude more often to women than to men who travel by air.

104

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 105

121. Dog (and) pig. See Lako wawi (No. 86) 122. Fat as a large pig Hume bhia wawi méze A fat, large-bodied man or woman Also expressed as having “a body like a large pig” (weki bhia ko wawi méze), the phrase is obviously comparable to English “fat as a pig.” On the other hand, it is not nearly as negative as the English metaphor – nor, indeed, is being “fat” (hume). In fact, so long as a person is not decidedly obese, hume among Nage often denotes a relatively positive quality, especially when applied to growing children. Although a person can be considered too fat, describing someone as “fat as a large pig” can accordingly be said in jest, or light-heartedly, and is not necessarily considered insulting. 123. Give birth like pigs, hatch chicks like hens Dhadhi bhia wawi, mesa bhia manu Bear many children Having many children is something Nage generally desire, and the phrase is thus employed in requests contained in speeches of offering addressed to beneficent spiritual beings. Although these do not include animal names, the same desire, and moreover the same complementary pairing of “pig” and “chicken,” is expressed in the ritual usages dhadhi bi, mesa kapa, “give birth prolifically, hatch in abundance” (applied to trees and other plants, kapa means “thick, dense”), and peni bi, wesi méze, “feed (poultry) so they multiply, feed (pigs) so they grow large” (see further Forth 2016, 66, 142) – phrases that not only express a request for abundant livestock but also for numerous children. In all these expressions, the pairing of pigs and chickens reflects the fact that these are the major domesticates kept and fed inside villages, where their care falls largely to women. 124. Like a pig Bhia ko’o wawi wawi A lazy, indolent person, who sleeps a great deal, or a greedy person

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

105

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 106

Referring specifically to a domestic pig and usually expressed as a simile, the combination of indolence (sleeping a great deal) and greed (eating a great deal) appears crucial to this metaphor, as it does to counterparts in English. Here as elsewhere, reduplication of the animal name (wawi wawi) renders a general, collective, or categorical sense rather than the literal plural, and in fact one can also say bhia ko’o wawi. On the other hand, a regular commentator claimed that one could not or should not simply say “like a pig”; rather, a speaker must specify ka bhia ko’o wawi, “to eat like a pig” – thus specifying greed rather than indolence – or bodo bhia ko’o wawi, specifying stupidity or obduracy (No. 132). 125. Pig in a vale of tui trees is struck by a blowpipe dart, hurrying to feed on Arenga palm dates falls down head first Wawi hobo tui gena ana supi, ‘aba pe wole boba tobhe ‘obhe A woman who is forward with men and in consequence becomes engaged in sex Lyrics to a circle-dance song usually performed in connection with annual pugilistic competitions (etu), the phrases, addressed by men to women, provide another example of the genre named pata néke, and, as is typical of this genre, the component metaphors have a definite sexual import. As all commentators recognized, the “pig” is a woman while the “blowpipe dart” is the male penis. “Hurrying in search of dates” is less clear but refers to an action of the “pig,” who, apparently in consequence of her desire to consume the edible fruit of the Arenga palm, is described not just as falling down but as falling on her face with her buttocks and genitalia exposed and sticking in the air. One commentator expressly identified the Arenga dates as a reference to a man or men. It may be no coincidence that, at the male pugilistic competitions where the refrain is sung, men drink copious amounts of toddy tapped from the trees that provide the dates. Moreover, the competitions, always held during the dry months from June to August, are recognized as a time of sexual licence, when young unmarried people (as well as some already married) seek out members of the opposite sex. As I discovered no definite significance for “vale of tui trees,” this specification appears motivated primarily by the assonance of tui and supi. Assonance is further evident in the combination of wole, tobhe, and ‘obhe. As is often the case in songs, central

106

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 107

Figure 7 Sow with piglets (No. 123)

Nage ‘aba and ‘obhe are frequently rendered as raba and robhe, thus pronouncing the /r/ that has been lost in this dialect but is retained elsewhere. In view of the identification of the penis with a blowpipe dart, the foregoing expression reveals the conceptual metaphors “sexual exploits = hunting” and “women = game animals.” Though not explicitly an animal metaphor, these find further expression in the Nage phrase zapa tuba, “to try out (one’s) spear,” referring especially to a youth’s first sexual encounter after undergoing the rite of “circumcision” (gedho loza). Here tuba, denoting a hunting spear, refers of course to the penis. Whether the metaphor implicates any particular kind of game animal is unclear. However, a comparable Sumbanese usage involves asking male adolescents, before they are circumcised, “how many pigs have you speared” (Forth 1981, 161), an idiom that obviously equates women with pigs. 126. Pig sitting on its hind quarters Wawi seze péga A person in a desperate situation bravely awaiting whatever fate befalls him

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

107

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 108

The phrase refers to a wild pig, usually a boar, that hunters have run to a state of exhaustion and that simply sits waiting for the dogs to attack, ready to strike back with snout and tusks and fight to the bitter end. Nage remark how pigs in such a state typically sit on their hind quarters after the manner of a dog or cat. 127. Pig slaughtered off-centre (ineptly) (Bhia) Wawi wela ghébhi A shrieking child, anyone who screams noisily and incessantly Nage slaughter pigs by striking them vertically with a parang in the centre of the head, from just above the snout to the nape (see figure 8). This should kill the animal instantly. If the strike is off centre, the pig will survive the blow and begin squealing (fi) loudly. 128. Pig’s nose Izu wawi Heel of the (human) foot The usage was explained as reflecting the fact that an adult’s heel (at least among traditionally bare-foot Nage) is hard and, unlike the softer toe end of the foot, can be used to break soil. Similarly a pig uses its nose, or snout, to root in the ground. 129. Pigs rooting in vines, Wawi koba. See Goats in undergrowth (No. 71) 130. Pigs wallow, Wawi jola. See Deer bathe (No. 163) 131. Shit (faeces) on a pig’s head Ta’i ulu wawi A despicable person A general deprecation, the expression draws on the traditional Nage practice of defecating on the ground, especially on a slope just outside the bounds of a village, in a designated place exposed to domestic pigs. The pigs would then consume the faeces, but sometimes a pig would come too close to the defe-

108

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 109

Figure 8 Slaughtering pigs in the traditional manner (No. 127)

cator, so that faeces would fall on the animal’s head. While not explicitly depicting pigs as dirty animals, like English idioms the expression nevertheless reveals some association of pigs with dirt. Recently, the practices enabling this metaphor have changed. Partly following government directives, most Nage nowadays employ enclosed latrines to which domestic animals have far less access, and pigs are usually tethered or penned. Still, the memory of former ways remains strong enough to make the image meaningful. 132. Stupid, ignorant like a pig Bodo bhia ko’o wawi A stupid or obstinate person Somewhat like the familiar English animal metaphor “pig ignorant,” bodo does not mean inherently unintelligent or dull-witted but has more the sense

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

109

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 110

of “slow to respond” and “obtuse,” including “deliberately obtuse’ – or “pigheaded” – as well as “ignorant” in the informal sense of “coarse, ill-mannered.” As Nage themselves recognize, bodo is semantically distinct from other words translatable as “stupid,” such as dhozo and jinga, which refer more to apparent mental incapacity or dull-wittedness. Although some commentators suggested the word may reflect borrowing from Indonesian bodoh, bodok (“stupid, dull-witted,” also “ignorant” and “indifferent”), this is unlikely, especially as older Nage affirmed that bodo has always been used in the expression. Also, bodo occurs in the western Keo variant bodo bhila wawi, though the Lio version, bongo ngére wawi (cf. Ngadha bongo ngongo ro, “extremely stupid,” Arndt 1961) employs a different term. Although the metaphor applies mainly or specifically to domestic rather than wild pigs, which Nage regard as mentally capable adversaries in the hunt, Nage discourse on pigs provides no evidence that they consider pigs as generally less intelligent than other animals, a point they sometimes made explicitly. This would seem to confirm that bodo does not simply mean “lacking in intelligence” and, additionally, that the metaphor is informed by other qualities of pigs, and specifically domestic pigs – for example, their apparent indolence – as much as by any imputed lack of mental ability. 133. Take back the pig meat Weda walo poza wawi Taking a wife from an established wife-taker According to their system of asymmetric marriage alliance, Nage should give pigs or serve pork only to parties that take wives, or have done so in the past. Accordingly, on occasions when affines formally meet, wife-takers can receive and consume only pork, while pork is prohibited to wife-givers, who then consume other kinds of meat, provided by wife-givers. Pigs and pork therefore “move” in the same direction as women; thus, to take a bride from a wife-taker is to take back something that has previously been given, thereby initiating an illicit direct exchange between two groups and confusing the distinction of “wife-givers” (moi ga’e) and “wife-takers” (ana weta). Instead of weda, “pull (out), retract,” one also hears ala, “to take.” A synonymous phrase for a direct exchange of women is tu bhei bhole soge wawi, “to stick a carrying pole through the legs of a tethered pig.” This

110

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 111

is less explicit but, according to general usage, expresses essentially the same idea, although it more specifically conveys the image of preparing to carry a pig to a wife-giver, a party that should be giving pigs to the carriers. Nage always tether the legs, especially of pigs given to another for slaughter, and then carry the animal upside down on a bamboo or wooden pole. (The number of men required to carry the pole is therefore used as a measure of the size of the pig given.) 134. Wild pig Wawi witu A man who is always moving around and therefore difficult to locate Motivating this metaphor, Nage note, is the ability of wild pig herds to cover a large territory in a short time and their habit of never remaining long in a single place. Denoting a negative behaviour, the phrase is sometimes applied in exasperation to a man one wants to meet but who is frequently not at home or in another place where one would expect to find him. “Wild pig” seems to be used only for men and never for women, partly because women are not nearly as mobile as men. 135. Pig cricket Cico wawi A smaller kind of cricket This is a folk taxonomic name contrasting to “buffalo cricket” (No. 21). Comparison with Nos. 136 and 137 suggests that factors other than the insect’s relatively small size, conceived by analogy to pigs and buffalo, may inform the metaphorical name. 136. Pig prawn Kuza wawi A kind of freshwater prawn A folk taxonomic term. Nage analyze the name as referring to the crustacean’s dark skin and somewhat humped back, both described as features also found in pigs.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

111

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 112

137. Pig wasp Fua wawi A kind of wasp A folk taxonomic that, according to commentators, may be motivated either by the wasp’s generally dark colour, similar to the dark skin and black hair of the majority of local pigs, or by its high-pitched sound, which resembles the squeal of a pig (Forth 2016, 251). 138. Wala pig Wawi wala A kind of spider, reputedly poisonous No one I questioned could say why “pig” (wawi) should appear in the spider’s name (see further Forth 2016, 338). Formally, the name is comparable to two names incorporating “dog” as the nominal element (Nos. 110, 111) and another two, also denoting arachnids, which incorporate “cat” (Nos. 157, 158). 139. Pig ‘abu ‘Abu wawi A kind of grass So named because it is eaten by pigs, the grass differs from a common sort called simply ‘abu. Verheijen (1990, 36) lists the So’a cognate rabu wawi as Cyperus (a genus of tropical sedges). 140. Pig’s saliva Lua wawi A kind of vine The plant is described as exuding a foamy liquid that recalls the saliva (ae lua) of a pig. Verheijen (1990, 37) gives an apparent eastern Ngadha cognate, rura wawi, as Cissus, a genus of woody vines. 141. Pig shit leaves Wunu ta’i wawi A kind of plant

112

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 113

This may be the plant called by the same name in some Lio dialects, which Verheijen (1990, 76) identifies as a species of Vernonia, a large genus of shrubs, some with edible leaves (Nage wunu). Nage informants disagreed as to whether the leaves of this particular plant could be eaten. 142. Pig bag Be wawi Large sort of men’s shoulder bag According to Nage, the bags are so named because a small pig would fit inside. Contributing to the term’s metaphorical character, such bags are not in fact used for carrying piglets, or at least not regularly, and on several occasions I noticed that Nage found the name humorous. 143. Red pig Wawi to Antares Although most Nage pigs are “black” (mite), some are of a colour classified as “red” (to). Located in the constellation Scorpius, the bright red star Antares stands opposite the constellation of the Pleiades (Ko, also denoting a net or net bag); thus, one rises only after the other has set and the two are never seen together in the night sky. As in other parts of Indonesia, Nage observe the positions of the stars in gauging the passage of the year and organizing agricultural and other activities, including the annual ritual hunt of pigs and deer. Like other eastern Indonesians, Nage also recount a myth relating how the two stars, often represented as an incestuous brother-sister pair, came to be permanently separated. Accordingly, Nage describe two people who always avoid one another, so that when one arrives in a place the other immediately leaves, as being “like the Pleiades and the Red pig” (bhia Ko ne’e Wawi To).

CAT • Felis catus • MEO, NGO NGOE Listed below are metaphors referring to both domestic and wild cats. By all available indications, cats were introduced quite recently to Flores, perhaps little more than 200 or 250 years ago. But despite the animal’s recent introduction,

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

113

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 114

Nage cat metaphors are relatively numerous. So too are other symbolic usages pertaining to cats (Forth 2016, 102–4), and it may be relevant in both respects that, owing in part to their value as mousers, cats are the one animal allowed free access to Nage houses. Wild or feral cats are distinguished as meo witu (“forest cats”), but nearly all metaphors mention only meo (“cat” or “domestic cat,” sometimes specified as meo bo’a, “village cat”). The one exception is ngo ngoe, referring to a particular kind of wild cat (No. 155). 144. Bent like a cat’s tail Léko bhia éko meo A dishonest person, someone who is not “straight” Sometimes expressed as an admonition “do not bend (be bent) like a cat’s tail” or “let us not speak like a cat’s bent tail,” the metaphor reflects the bent or “knotty” tails of many village cats (see figure 9), supplemented by the recognized contrast with the straight or straighter tail of Palm civets (No. 206), the vehicle for the opposite human quality. Even when cats have relatively straight tails, Nage say, these always turn up a little at the end. The expression obviously involves the same metaphor as English “straight” and “bent” (or “crooked”) as references to moral character – a conceptual metaphor that would seem to have a worldwide occurrence (Kövecses 2010). Also involving the body part of an animal, a more specific parallel is found in the English expression “bent (or crooked) as a dog’s hind leg.” 145. Cat biting its own tail Meo kiki éko A person who makes accusations against members of his or her own family; someone with a loud voice, a noisy person In the first sense, the metaphor also occurs in Keo, on Flores’s south central coast, where it refers to conflict or fighting within a group (Tule 1998). How such infighting is comparable to an animal biting its own tail requires no further comment. In the second sense, the term is used to describe small children whose crying or screaming is compared to caterwauling. Indeed, many Nage appear to understand meo kiki éko as referring only or mostly to the harsh, high-pitched, often drawn out, uncanny and disturbing vocalization

114

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 115

Figure 9 Cat with a bent tail (No. 144)

cats sometimes make, usually at night, and this they regularly identify as the sound of cats, or specifically a male cat, mating. Whereas this interpretation appears empirically well grounded, the phenomenon is further associated with witches. But this association plays no obvious part in the metaphor or its motivation.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

115

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 116

146. Cat burying its faeces Meo kamo ta’i A person who conceals wrong-doing The metaphor finds its motivation in an obvious and distinctive behaviour of cats. Here, “faeces” (ta’i) stands for anything negative that a person wishes to hide from others. 147. Cat evading (or fooling) dogs Meo do’o lako A person who is skilled at avoiding others or someone whom it is difficult to hold to a commitment Nage identify the source of the metaphor as a cat’s agility and ability to escape from adversaries with evasive movements and quick changes of position. As an example of “a cat evading a dog” one commentator cited a woman who, being pursued by a particular man, always manages to be absent when he comes looking for her. In this case, the woman was the “cat,” and the man the “dog.” But the expression can also be applied to a man. 148. Cat from Geo Meo Geo A pugilist given to scratching with the fingernails The expression alludes to a manner of fighting in etu (pugilistic competitions) reputedly characteristic of men of Geo (Géro) and surrounding regions, including Réndu and Dhére-Isa, who are reputed to let their fingernails grow for this purpose. Nage remark how this renders them especially dangerous opponents, and included in chants that accompany pugilistic bouts is the warning “beware the Geo cats” (be’o be’o meo Geo). Referring to a broader region to the northeast of Nage, Geo in this context is a synecdoche and, as Nage commentators themselves remarked, is selected because it rhymes with meo. Why cats are used to refer to people who use their nails as weapons is obvious; at the same time, the face of a competitor severely scratched in etu can be described as “looking like it has been torn by a civet” (ngia bhia bheku sasi; see No. 204). Men called Meo Geo are more specifically described as scratching

116

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 117

opponents’ faces with the left hand while the right holds the kepo, a sort of cosh made of buffalo hide and twine. It is only with the kepo that pugilists can legitimately strike an opponent and draw blood. (Drawing blood is a specific object of the competitions, and once a competitor starts to bleed, however slightly, the bout is ended.) As used by others, the metaphor “Geo cat” thus expresses criticism, but it is also used self-referentially. In 2017 I observed a mini-bus owned and operated by a Geo man who had named it “Meo Geo.” (In Flores, as elsewhere in Indonesia, all such vehicles have proper names.) A comparable metaphor referring to male inhabitants of an entire region is “Réndu monkey” (No. 236). 149. Cat gripping a chicken in its jaws Meo seme manu A person with a horrible, fiendish, or malicious facial expression, or someone who temporarily presents such an appearance Usually expressed as “a face like a cat gripping a chicken,” the metaphor derives from a cat’s habit of killing fowls, especially when insufficiently fed by its owners. As Nage remarked, cats look terrifying in this circumstance because their canines become exposed, and as one commentator remarked, the metaphor can accordingly describe, more specifically, someone with a “broad, ugly mouth.” Nage otherwise regard cats as physically attractive animals, yet, as anyone familiar with cats will likely agree, in respect to their teeth and claws cats present a savage aspect and hence display an uncanny ability of appearing pretty and evil-looking at the same time. The metaphor is one of many that can be used in derisive banter and thus applied to people who in fact do not particularly display the features alluded to. 150. Cat that conceals its claws Meo ta’a zoko kungu Someone who keeps malicious intentions hidden, a treacherous person The metaphor hardly requires comment. Cats are the only animals known to Nage with fully retractable claws. One man thought the expression may be a loan translation from a synonymous Indonesian national language phrase (kucing sembunyi kuku), but considering the obvious parallel between

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

117

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 118

hidden intentions and retracted claws, independent development is equally likely. In regard to human applications, the phrase is comparable to English “snake in the grass.” 151. Cat that moves its kittens Meo ta’a dhada ana Someone who disturbs or upsets an established arrangement Motivating this metaphor is the habit of mother cats moving their kittens from one spot to another. Nage say cats will move their litters seven times before settling on the seventh. (Including the spot where the cat delivered, this might imply occupation of eight different locations, the number eight for Nage symbolizing completion.) According to a specific interpretation, the phrase refers especially to a man who keeps moving his family about and who seemingly cannot decide where to live. 152. Cat’s face Ngia meo A frightening or dirty (human) face Usually phrased as “having a face like a cat” (bhia ngia meo), the metaphor is applied in two ways: to a face, especially a child’s, that is smeared with dirt and so superficially resembles the face of a cat with variegated pelage (marked with streaks, spots, or blotches), and to a person whose face or expression is terrifying or suggests ill will. In the second application, it can be understood as an abbreviated form of No. 149. 153. Cat’s waist ‘Ége meo A person skilled in evasion or avoiding things In a particular interpretation, the metaphor was described as applying to “slippery” people, clever at escaping blame or who, while appearing to be at fault, are always able to excuse themselves. Usually expressed as bhia ‘ége meo, “having a waist like a cat,” the usage derives from cats’ flexibility and their ability to enter narrow places, bend their bodies, and quickly turn or change

118

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 119

direction (cf. No. 147). In this respect, the cat evidently takes the place of the weasel in English metaphor, where “weasel,” the name of a similarly lithe and agile creature, describes an untrustworthy person, able to “get out,” or indeed “weasel out,” of things. There are no weasels or any members of the Mustelidae in eastern Indonesia. 154. Dogs and cats. See Lako ne’e meo (No. 101) 155. Large feral or wild cat Ngo ngoe Someone with a low, gruff voice An onomatopoeic term, ngo ngoe is the creature’s folk taxonomic name, and a person so described is usually specified as “having a voice like a ngo ngoe” (sezu bhia ko’o ngo ngoe). Most evidence suggests that the zoological referent is a large feral cat, and usually a male, although an alternative possibility is the truly wild Leopard cat Prionailurus bengalensis (Forth 2017b). 156. Spotted or striped cat Meo déto Something or someone ambiguous, not of a consistent or determinate character The phrase denotes a cat with variegated pelage, thus not consistently of a single colour. Combined with “mottled horse” and “speckled fowl” (Nos. 52, 281), it can refer to a territory divided among owners belonging to several different groups. Another application is a person whose character or background is unclear, difficult to make out. In this respect an interesting comparison is English “checkered,” as in a “checkered career” or “checkered past.” 157. (Untranslatable) Gogo meo A kind of spider Neither in this term nor the following (No. 158) is it clear why meo (“cat”) appears in the names of two spiders, although it is worth noting that the

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

119

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 120

word for “cat” also occurs in the name of a spider in the Tetum language of Timor (Mathijsen 1906; Forth 2016, 337–8). Gogo meo further denotes a kind of bogey represented by a crude mask blackened with charcoal and used to frighten children (Forth 2008, 32–6), and indeed cats themselves can serve this function, as when recalcitrant youngsters are told that a cat is coming to get them. 158. (Untranslatable) Kaka meo A kind of spider See No. 157. Kaka occurs, with varying local interpretations, in several other Nage animal names (applied to birds, fish, and lizards), and in the Manggarai language of western Flores kaka has the general meaning of “animal.” The name might therefore be translated as “cat creature.” 159. Cat’s claw Kungu meo A thorny vine Nage describe the thorns as tearing into a person’s flesh, like cats’ claws. 160. Cat’s fur Fu meo A kind of fine grass The grass is described as resembling the fur of a cat. 161. Cat’s tail (or cat’s tail tree) Éko meo (kaju éko meo) A kind of tree Verheijen (1990, 48) lists the same name in Endenese for both Neyraudia arundinacea and Pennisetum macrostachyum. As Nage observe, the magenta blossoms do indeed resemble a cat’s tail. English “cattail” refers to a quite different sort of plant, being the American name for the British “bulrush” – apparently another English plant name incorporating an animal name.

120

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 121

162. Cat’s whiskers Kumi meo A kind of plant The Nage phrase translates the Indonesian name kumis kucing, which Nage normally use for the plant and which, not surprisingly, they describe as a recent introduction. The Indonesian term is also used for what is probably the same plant in So’a, which Verheijen (1990, 28) identifies as Orthosiphon aristatus.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

121

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 122

4 Mammals in Metaphor: Exclusively Wild Kinds

DEER • Timor deer Cervus timorensis • KOGHA Given the value Nage place on hunting deer, the small number of deer metaphors is surprising: I recorded just eight, one of which, moreover, may be of foreign derivation while several others have similar human referents. A possible explanation may be found in details of Nage oral history, which suggest that central Nage have moved into regions where deer are available as regular game only during the last two to three hundred years. At present, deer occur only in less forested areas to the north of central Nage, and consistent with both observations is the evidently external origin of special terms associated with deer in central Nage, especially terms denoting growth stages, which reflect dialects spoken to the north and northeast. Also noteworthy is a lack of certainty regarding how long deer have been present anywhere on Flores Island (Forth 2016, 108–9, 327–8). 163. Deer bathe, (wild) pigs wallow Kogha poma, wawi jola People indulging in an abundance of palm juice (or palm wine) Composing a standard binary composite kogha wawi, “deer [and] wild pigs” are the most valued game animals for Nage and together form the object of the annual ritual hunt. The present parallelism forms part of a longer ritual request made when tapping Arenga palms (Arenga pinnata), especially when a palm is tapped for the first time. The ritual leader then requests that the

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 123

Figure 10 Hunters at a shrine, annual ritual hunt (No. 163)

palm or palms deliver an abundance of juice (toddy) – so much that deer and pigs will be able to bathe and wallow in it and that the trees will be swarmed by sunbirds and friarbirds, nectar-feeding species that drink palm juice (see Nos. 343, 412). Commentators disagreed as to whether the phrases refer metaphorically to human beings. However, the situation hyperbolically conveyed by the expression clearly refers to a great abundance, not of bathing water or mud but of palm juice, thus something to be enjoyed not by animals but exclusively by humans. As regards pigs in particular, the metaphor recalls the English usage “pig in muck” (see also “like a pig in clover,” Palmatier 1995, 236), referring to a situation in which people are “in their element” and thus experience great enjoyment or contentment. One regular commentator further interpreted the metaphor as referring to a woman who makes herself

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

123

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 124

available for sex with anyone and whose body is thus comparable to a wallow or mudhole (poma or jola), a place used by any animal wishing to take a bath. 164. Deer down in the plain Kogha lau mala Someone who acts without restraint, does not follow rules, and behaves without regard to others; an arrogant person One commentator linked the metaphor with the habit of deer that run freely with heads held high and apparently pay no attention to whatever they pass, an interpretation that recalls another deer metaphor (No. 168). Lau mala, “down in the plain, lowlands,” refers to the region where deer are found, a large part of which lies beyond the territory of central Nage proper. As noted previously, for central Nage, the direction named lau (seaward, downstream, thus to the north) holds negative connotations, and these are also revealed in other animal metaphors (Nos. 36, 87, 103). Before the twentieth century, Nage regularly waged war in several regions to the north (lau), from which they took many captives as slaves. 165. Deer glanced by a spear Kogha ghabi tuba A person who immediately flees from a place after being given a fright The metaphor describes a deer that a spear has just missed or wounded only slightly and that is therefore panicked into flight. 166. Deer that has entered a village Kogha kono bo’a Someone who finds him- or herself in an unfamiliar place or situation and does not know where to turn As noted earlier (No. 77) the metaphor may derive from the Indonesian national language. Its motivation lies in the nervous disposition of deer that, finding themselves caught in a place from which they cannot easily escape, will become alarmed and run hither and yon.

124

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 125

167. Lota deer Kogha lota Someone who behaves in a confused, chaotic, or erratic way; a person who appears nervous or ill at ease The metaphor is motivated by the behaviour of deer when alarmed or set to flight. Lota was first recorded in the phrase lota lata, understood as a synonym of ‘ila ‘ala, “chaotic, confused, startled,” but the meaning of lota alone is unknown to most Nage, and it is evidently not a local term. A few informants, however, described lota as a term for “deer” in other parts of central Flores, and, as I was able to confirm from subsequent fieldwork, the term denotes male deer in the Lamaholot dialects of the far eastern part of Flores and the adjoining islands of Solor and Adonara. Central Nage sometimes reduce kogha lota to lota – as in “(to be, behave) like a lota” – or lota witu, “forest lota,” in reference to which some informants interpreted the terms as denoting an animal of an unkown kind. “Forest lota” recalls Réndu and Munde rusa witu, “deer,” which distinguishes deer from goats, usually designated simply as rusa (Forth 2012a). 168. Male deer that keeps running not looking where it is going Kogha lota bholo ngada doa An ill-mannered person without regard for others In regard to this expression particularly, it is interesting that Lamaholot lota (see No. 167) refers specifically to male deer. Ngada means to “hold one’s head high,” as does doa in this context, so the two words together convey a single sense. (Bholo is “only, just, nothing but.”) According to Nage, a characteristic of people thus described is that they will ignore other people as they pass by, like a large buck not looking to the left or right as it runs freely. Both semantically and in regard to the animal behaviour on which it is based, the metaphor overlaps significantly with two other deer metaphors (Nos. 164, 167). Mature male deer, presumably because of the weight of their antlers, keep their heads raised not only when moving but also when standing still – like an arrogant person with his “head in the air.” However, while implying arrogance, the Nage phrase can simply refer to a lack of good manners.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

125

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 126

169. Deer rattan Ua kogha A kind of grass Despite the name, the plant is not a kind of rattan but a sort of thin-stemmed grass with very long roots that are difficult to pull up. Verheijen (1990, 43) lists the So’a cognate ura kogha as the name for Sida acuta and S. rhombifolia. 170. Deer’s hoof Kuku kogha A kind of small tree or shrub Described by one commentator as resembling a vine, the plant is so named because both the stem and the fruit are hard, like a deer’s hooves. The fruits are used in a children’s game called bedi koki.

PORCUPINE • Javan porcupine Hystrix javanica • KUTU Introduced by humans from more westerly Indonesian islands some four thousand years ago, porcupines have long been present on Flores and are hunted regularly. Hunting porcupines requires special techniques and involves speech taboos bound up with the animals’ status as possessions of forest spirits. However, Nage metaphors incorporating the porcupine are few, and none refers to this spiritual status nor (with the possible exception of the first listed below) to porcupine hunting. The fact that the central Nage name for the porcupine, kutu, is a homonym of their term for “louse” (see No. 531) is explained elsewhere (Forth 2016, 115). This may be the place to mention another practice concerning porcupines, one I have previously characterized as a “symbolic or metaphorical usage” (Forth 2004c, 433; Forth 2016, 151–9) and, moreover, as an instance of irony. When distinguishing sex in porcupines, Nage employ the sex differentiable terms for birds and other non-mammals, even though they are quite definite that porcupines are not birds but mammals and therefore speak of this as an extraordinary and puzzling linguistic practice. As a figurative usage, calling porcupines, in effect, “cocks” and “hens” is most comparable to the naming of certain animals with terms referring to other, quite different, animals –

126

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 127

for example calling the mole-cricket “sky dog” (lako lizu, No. 110) in the full knowledge that the insect is not a dog and resembles dogs only insofar as it dig holes in the earth. The parallel finds support in the fact that, just as molecrickets possess no other name, so applying the sex differentiable terms for non-mammals is the only way, or at least the only correct way, of verbally distinguishing male and female porcupines. 171. Blaming the porcupine, accusing the Giant rat, as it happens the male monkey is equally guilty ‘Udu kutu, pe’u bétu, laka ‘o’a mosa ta’a sala mogha A person (especially a man) who accuses others of wrong-doing but who himself participates equally in the same misdeeds Employed as a proverb, the expression has several variants. Sala (“to be in error”) is sometimes replaced by naka, meaning “steal”; other times naka or sala are left out altogether so people simply say ‘o’a laka mogha, “the monkey is in fact the same” or “has done the same.” In addition, Nage often specify a “male monkey,” as in the version given here. As the monkey represents a hypocritical accuser, the metaphor is virtually synonymous with “monkey scolding a pig” (No. 225) and indeed has the same meaning as the English expression “the kettle calling the pot black.” (A Nage botanical metaphor of identical import is pau ‘udu mude, “mango accuses the orange,” two fruits that are equally sweet, and equally sour when unripe.) Its motivation lies partly in the fact that all three creatures are wild animals that steal from cultivated fields, in which respect it is further noteworthy that monkeys usually do more damage than either porcupines or Giant rats. At the same time, since other animals, including domestic animals, also do damage to crops, the selection of kutu (porcupine) and bétu (Giant rat) together with the largely synonymous verbs ‘udu and pe’u appears decisively determined by prosodic considerations, as is the juxtaposition of ‘o’a (“monkey”) and mogha (“also, as well, equally”), and also mosa (where a male monkey is specified) – in each instance with regard to assonance involving the vowel combinations e//u, u//u, and o//a. Nevertheless, it is additionally significant that “porcupine” and “Giant rat” also combine to form a standard binary composite, kutu bétu, designating nocturnally hunted animals of similar size and shape (Forth 2016, 143). This suggests, then, that the basic opposition is between “porcupine” and “monkey,” as in No. 173.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

127

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 128

172. Live like a porcupine Muzi bhia ko’o kutu A person who leads a regular, orderly life The metaphor draws on the fact that porcupines, after going out in search of food, always return to the same hole and will use this hole over long periods of time. In this regard, Nage contrast porcupines to junglefowl (No. 367), and I first recorded the expression in the form of a customary admonition: “Let us not live in the manner of junglefowl, let us live like porcupines” (muzi ma’e bhia ko’o kata, muzi kita bhia ko kutu). Given the similarity of the names kutu and kata, prosody apparently provides further motivation for this association, yet the attributed behavioural contrast seems also to reflect zoologically accurate observation of the two creatures.

Figure 11 Porcupines in a cage (No. 172)

128

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 129

173. Porcupine digging, monkey breaking Kutu koe, ‘o’a sae A person who consumes things in a destructive and wasteful manner without any thought for economy The phrases focus on porcupines and monkeys as destructive crop pests. Porcupines will dig up whole plants to obtain the roots, thereby destroying the entire plant; monkeys cause similar damage, for example when they snap or break off the stems of ripening maize. 174. Small porcupine Kutu pudi A small, stocky, or well-built person Nage speak of kutu pudi as a particular kind of porcupine, distinct from a larger sort called kutu kua, but since only one species of porcupine has been recorded for Flores kutu pudi likely refers simply to smaller specimens, which Nage describe as typically fleshier than larger porcupines. A person described as being like a “small porcupine” is someone who is short but robust and well-proportioned, and the phrase is often applied to a young child who is plump and solidly built. In the latter case especially, the condition can be described as hume, usually translatable as “fat.” 175. Porcupine’s gall-bladder (tree) Pedhu kutu (lo pedhu kutu) A kind of tree Generally described as a tree so named because it tastes extremely bitter, like the gall-bladder of a porcupine, the bark is used to treat malaria and also as a contraceptive. One informant, however, described it not as a tree but as a kind of grass, though one also with a bitter taste and similarly employed in treating symptoms of malaria and illness of the spleen. For So’a, Verheijen (1990) provisionally identifies the plant name tuka kutu (“porcupine’s stomach”) as a species of Tinospora, a herbaceous vine. It would appear, therefore, that “porcupine gall-bladder” may refer to more than one kind of bitter-tasting medicinal plant. Nage also use the bark of the zita tree, Alstonia scholaris, to treat fevers apparently caused by malaria.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

129

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 130

FLORES GIANT RAT • Papagomys armandvillei • BÉTU In view of Nage familiarity with this remarkable animal, it is surprising how few metaphors employ the Giant rat. The species is the largest of the world’s murids (rats and mice) and is endemic to Flores. Distinctive in regard to its much greater size (up to eighty centimetres from head to tail), its aggressive temperament, and injurious bite – and thus the danger it poses to hunters and their dogs (Forth 2016, 120–1) – the Giant rat is distinguished in Nage animal taxonomy from all other rats and mice, collectively designated as dhéke (a category that can also include shrews). At the same time, although not classified as a kind of “rat” (dhéke), Nage recognize morphological and other similarities between Giant rats and other rats, and this contrast is exploited in three metaphors listed in the next section (Nos. 182–4). 176. Accusing the Giant rat, Pe’u bétu. See Blaming the porcupine (No. 171) 177. Belly like a dead Giant rat Tuka bhia ko’o bétu mata A person with a large, distended, or bloated belly As Nage remark, all Giant rats have large bellies, but the bellies of dead specimens are even larger, owing to bloating caused by putrefaction. For obvious reasons, the phrase is also applied to a glutton. 178. Giant rat in a cave whose belly is full of faeces, eats new sabi leaves (and) waits for the night when she will give birth Bétu lépa lia ta’i mo’o biza, sepa ngolo sabi kéze kobe mo’o dhadhi A promiscuous woman who consorts with various men and is therefore continually pregnant Yet another example of the genre pata néke (see chapter 2), these are lyrics sung while circle-dancing. Leaves of the sabi tree (Schleichera oleosa) are a common food of Giant rats. In at least two respects the phrases recall a buffalo metaphor (No. 11): lépa is a direction term used in the Géro dialect, while “cave, rockshelter” (lia) recalls Kawa, with the same meaning, though in No. 11 it is interpreted as the name of a particular place.

130

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 131

Figure 12 Dog with Giant rat (No. 176)

179. Giant rat’s belly Tuka bétu An ingrate; a person with a large, bloated belly In the second sense the phrase is synonymous with No. 177. With regard to the first, commentators remarked how, as very large, herbivorous rodents, Giant rats eat a great deal but also produce large amounts of faeces, so that someone whose “belly” is like a Giant rat’s similarly receives positive things (such as material help or favours) but reciprocates with bad behaviour. Nage might thus reprimand such a person by saying “I give you food, (but) your belly is like that of a Giant rat; you treat me badly” (nga’o ti’i kau ka, tuka kau tuka bétu, kau tau ‘é’e wai nga’o). The usage somewhat recalls the English metaphor “nourish a snake (or viper) in one’s bosom,” an expression deriving from the Aesop’s fable in which a farmer places a frozen viper inside his shirt

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

131

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 132

Figure 13 Hunter with Giant rat (No. 179)

to revive it but, after the creature recovers, is “rewarded” by the snake’s biting him (cited by Palmatier 1995, 271).

RATS and MICE (or “murids”) • Muridae • DHÉKE As a conventional metaphor, dhéke is unusual insofar as the category has been interpreted as a folk-intermediate (Forth 2012b; Forth 2016, 122–3), a more inclusive taxon subsuming five folk-generics. Of these five, only two are explicitly named in murid metaphors. One is dhéke laghi (No. 192); the other is mucu ‘o, denoting shrews, which, although scientifically identified as insectivores rather than rodents, are classified by Nage as a kind of dhéke. Some

132

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 133

metaphors employing dhéke can be interpreted as equally referring to smaller “mice” (dhéke menge or ana menge) and possibly dhéke laghi as well. On the other hand, there is no indication that any rat metaphor specifically alludes to dhéke ngewo, a kind of large forest-dwelling rat. As noted, dhéke does not include Giant rats, separately named as bétu, a circumstance facilitating the metaphorical use of these two categories as contrasting terms in Nos. 182–4. The number and variety of Nage murid metaphors accords with their very regular occurrence inside Nage houses and settlements. Since dhéke covers both rats and mice, translating these metaphors into English poses an obvious problem (see Eco 2003; Forth 2012b), and although I have mostly identified “rat” as the more appropriate term, it should be understood that in some instances “mouse” would be a suitable alternative. In his dictionary of the neighbouring Ngadha language, Arndt (1961, s.v. dhéke) mentions two murid metaphors I never heard in central Nage. One is “like a mouse that steals grain” referring to “a person who quickly carries something away”; the other is “mouth like a rat,” meaning “to speak rapidly; to prattle, chatter, babble.” The second mostly corresponds to two Nage shrew metaphors (Nos. 198, 200), although Nage interpret these as referring to someone who talks constantly rather than rapidly. 180. Having a single testicle like a male rat Base bhia ko’o dhéke hase A monorchid, a man possessing only one testicle As discussed elsewhere (Forth 2012b), it is doubtful whether many Nage actually believe that all male murids are monorchids, and in fact the metaphor appears to be largely motivated by prosody – specifically, the rhyme of base (“monorchid”) with hase, a sex differentiable term specifically denoting male murids (dhéke). Although I have discussed hase several times in print, only recently did I discover probable cognates in Lio lase (cf. Nage, Ngadha lasu, “penis”), a term Arndt (1933) glosses as “male member,” and Ngadha lase, “testicles and scrotum” (Arndt 1961). A connection of Nage hase with lase seems confirmed by the further occurrence of the latter in central Keo as a special term for male rats, and especially old male rats (Forth 2018c), thus with essentially the same meaning as Nage hase. All these comparisons support my previous interpretation of the Nage term as having a specifically sexual, or more particularly genital, reference (Forth 2004c; Forth 2012b, 61).

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

133

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 134

At the same time, Nage will occasionally interpret base (“monorchid”) in the foregoing expression as a reference to an empirical feature in male murids, and, to that extent, rather than experience of animals providing the source of a metaphor, it would appear that the metaphor may have given rise to a quasi-empirical idea (Forth 2016). On the other hand, the expression is rarely used, if at all, to refer to males who are actually monorchids but functions instead as a pejorative uttered in ribald banter among Nage men. 181. Immature mouse (or rat) Ana dhéke Human biceps; an abrasion or reddening of the skin This is yet another animal term applied to part of the human body, although, in this instance, to a bodily condition as well. Expressed for example in ana dhéke gedho, “a little mouse comes out” (referring to the flexing of the biceps), in regard to its first sense the metaphor is virtually identical to Latin musculis, “little mouse,” applied to muscles in general and of course reflected in the English word. In its second sense the metaphor is recognized as deriving from the raw redness of naked newborn rats and mice. Of someone whose hands are red, from abrasion or friction, Nage thus say, “your hands are as red as a baby rat (or mouse)” (lima kau bhia ana dhéke). 182. Mouse (or rat) mocking a Giant rat Dhéke néke bétu Someone who derides or criticizes a superior person The phrase can refer to a child or young person who derides an older adult, or a low-ranking person criticizing someone of high rank. The metaphor is motivated by the difference in size between the Giant rat (bétu) and smaller murids coinciding with an overall morphological similarity, and in this and the two following expressions (Nos. 183, 184) I therefore translate dhéke as “mouse” in order to emphasize this difference. Although the usage clearly turns on an analogy between the two animals and distinctions of social position, prosody has evidently influenced the selection of néke (in this context best translated as “mock”) as a reference to the action of the smaller rodent (dhéke).

134

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 135

183. Mouse (or rat) taking care of a Giant rat Dhéke pagha bétu A person who looks after a member of another community or group Pagha, “to care or provide for, to raise,” describes caring for both children and animals. As one commentator pointed out, while denoting physically very similar creatures dhéke and bétu nonetheless name two different sorts of animals. Thus the metaphor typically refers to someone who assists a person he or she is not normally obligated to assist. As Giant rats (bétu) are significantly larger and also more aggressive than other rats and mice (dhéke), the metaphor applies especially to helping people who are quite capable of caring for themselves, more capable even than the one who gives assistance and who may do so at the cost of giving less support to people to whom she/he is socially closer, including members of her/his own family. 184. Mouse (or rat) turned into a Giant rat Dhéke bale bétu A person who changes position on an issue; people of low rank who act as though they were of high rank Commentators offered two different interpretations of this usage, but both obviously reflecting the same physical contrast between Giant rats and other murids and their folk taxonomic treatment as essentially different animals. That it is the smaller animal that transforms into the larger is of course especially relevant to the second use, which Nage explained as a synonym of “the slave becomes the master” (ho’o bale ga’e) – another common expression that is not always employed literally. Especially in the first sense the metaphor can be expressed as “your speech is like, you speak like a (smaller) rat turning into a Giant rat” (punu e kau bhia dhéke bale bétu), and in one case I heard it used in reference to a man who claimed certain rumours were false but who – as the speaker pointed out – subsequently spoke as though they were true. While Nage entertain ideas about various sorts of animals transforming into animals of different kinds (Forth 2016, 276–94), smaller murids (dhéke) turning into Giant rats is not among these.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

135

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 136

185. Rat above (in a high place) Dhéke zéle Something or someone that distracts the attention of people engaged in conversation or another activity The phrase describes a rat or mouse that scampers along the rafters or some other part of a house. When this happens, everyone typically looks up and neglects what they are doing, so that their activity or conversation is disturbed. I first recorded the metaphor in reference to a cell (mobile) phone going off in the middle of a discussion. Subsequent ethnographic conversations of mine were disturbed by actual rats and were described in the same way. 186. Rat inside a bamboo rafter Dhéke loki A person who eats noisily; someone who talks excessively Loki are roof supports of giant bamboo. Not naming any particular kind of murid, dhéke loki refers to any commensal rat or mouse that gnaws into, enters, and nests inside a loki, where it continues to gnaw holes. The reference to a noisy eater alludes to the noise made by the gnawing rats. The second expression compares a noisy rat to a person who talks too much, thereby revealing matters that should be kept within one’s own group and exposing the group to harm from others. In the same way, holes made by “rafter rats” can cause rafters to crack and collapse and thus weaken a house, so the usage involves the same identification of a physical dwelling with a kin group – also contextually called a “house” (sa’o) – expressed in other metaphors (e.g., No. 187). 187. Rat that damages a house Dhéke ta’a ‘é’e sa’o A person who causes harm to his own group In this phrase ‘é’e (“ugly, bad”) has the verbal sense of “to make ugly, deface.” The expression necessarily refers to a commensal rat or mouse while the house is of course one inhabited by the rodent itself. Implicitly, like a rat that

136

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 137

ruins the house in which it lives, a person who, through words or deeds, does damage to his own group – by causing disunity or reducing the group’s reputation or weakening its position vis-à-vis others – also does damage to himor herself. 188. Rat with a broken placenta Dhéke funi beta A person who abandons a task before completing it Expressed as “speaking like a rat with a broken placenta” (punu bhia dhéke ta’a funi beta), the phrase can refer specifically to someone who abandons one topic of conversation and then begins talking about something else. Applied generally to mammals as well as humans, “broken placenta” describes a potentially fatal condition wherein part of the afterbirth remains stuck in the birth canal. No one could suggest why the metaphor specifies rats, so the selection of this animal would appear to be completely arbitrary. 189. Rat without an escape hole Dhéke ta’a wuwu mona A person who begins something he or she is unable to complete Nage speak of holes, cavities, and caves (all designated as lia) as always having, besides an entrance, a passage leading to another opening used as an exit. This is one sense of wuwu; another is “fontanelle.” Although I have never encountered the usage, it would seem likely that the metaphor also applies to people who enter into a situation or dealing from which they are unable to extricate themselves. The Nage phrase is reminiscent of “trapped like a rat,” but the English metaphor evidently has a different motivation, relating to human rat catching. 190. Rat’s face Ngia dhéke Someone who appears nervous or lacking in composure The metaphor alludes to the twitching face or snout of a rat as it sniffs the air. It can also be used to describe an ugly human face.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

137

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 138

191. Rat’s throat Foko dhéke Folds, fleshy segments on the human fingers and toes The phrase seems not to be so widely known as other metaphorical uses of parts of animal bodies to refer to (different) parts of human bodies. In one view, moreover, it should refer only to folds of the toes, where the toes meet the ball of the foot. The metaphor apparently reflects the small size of a murid’s neck rather, or more, than any similarity in shape between this and the folds in human digits. 192. Scampering rat Dhéke laghi Someone who is restless and cannot keep still As a folk taxon (more specifically a folk-generic), dhéke laghi (laghi, “to scamper,” “to spring [from place to place]”) names a particular kind of commensal rat (probably the Polynesian rat Rattus exulans) that Nage describe as especially active and mischievous. I recorded two possible applications: boisterous, misbehaving children who run hither and yon causing disturbance and who may be compared to scampering rats as a chastisement; and people who live an unsettled existence. According to one regular commentator, the term is also used as a metaphor for people of low status and in straightened circumstances. In this connection, he further noted how, in Nage animal taxonomy, dhéke laghi refers to a murid intermediate in size between the largest kind of commensal rat (dhéke méze, including Rattus rattus, the house rat) and the smallest (dhéke menge or ana menge, one or more species of mice Mus spp.). 193. Rat bells Woda dhéke A small plant This is possibly a species of Crotalaria, or “rattlepods” (following Verheijen 1990, 44, who gives this identification for a plant of the same name in a Ngadha dialect). The plant is so named because the dried seed pods, when shaken, sound like bells and are therefore used by children as playthings.

138

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 139

Woda, however, can also refer to testicles (usually called ‘ade), and, according to a different interpretation, the name means “rat’s testicles.” If this is correct, it may reflect a more general association of male rats with sexuality (see No. 180). 194. Rat’s ears Hinga dhéke A kind of vine or creeping plant Both in size and form, the small leaves of the vine are said to resemble the ears of a rat. 195. Rat jackfruit Mo dhéke A kind of jackfruit (Artocarpus sp.) So named because the fruit are smaller than other jackfruit, this is one of at least five kinds Nage distinguish by name. 196. Rat’s tail Éko dhéke A dead palm tree The term more specifically refers to old, dead coconut or (less often) areca palms with just a few withered boughs and possibly fruit left at the top, thus consisting of little more than the trunk and suggesting the tail of an enormous rat (see Figure 14). Expressed as éko te’u I recorded the same usage in the Lio region (Wolo Ri’a). The visible appearance of a rat’s tail identically informs English metaphors like “rat-tail file” and “rat-tail comb” (Palmatier 1995, 317). 197. Lips like a shrew Wunu mumu bhia ko’o mucu ‘o A gossip Although shrews (Soricidae: Suncus spp., Crocidura spp.) belong to the scientific order Soricomorpha (formerly Insectivora), their classification by

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

139

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 140

Figure 14 “Rat’s tail” (No. 196)

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 141

Nage with mice and rats (dhéke) recalls earlier English “shrew-mouse” and modern German “Spitzmaus.” The present expression is virtually identical to “a mouth like a shrew” (No. 198), yet several commentators interpreted it as referring to someone who spreads gossip, especially gossip that proves harmful to others. In the same context, one of my most regular informants mentioned the shrew’s long, pointed snout and reported an idea (which I never heard from anyone else) that the snout can penetrate the anuses of larger rats; accordingly, he added, rats are scared of shrews, despite their much smaller size. This idea possibly reflects the pugnacity of shrews, a characteristic that may have inspired the English application of “shrew” to an ill-tempered, sharp-tongued woman. With reference to the English metaphor, Ammer (1989, 127) describes shrews as “disproportionately fierce” for their size, “fight[ing] one another to the death over a morsel of food,” and as “so pugnacious that at one time they were thought to be poisonous to farm animals who [sic] happened to cross their path.” These traits were then transferred to a “person of unpleasant personality, particularly one who nagged or scolded,” a metaphor later restricted to women. Nevertheless, how far the pugnacity of shrews may inform its metaphorical relation to human gossips among Nage is uncertain. 198. Mouth like a shrew Mumu bhia ko’o mucu ‘o Someone who talks constantly A more exact interpretation is “person whose mouth moves constantly, like the snout of a shrew.” The metaphor may recall the English idiom “to rabbit (on),” used in Britain as a reference to garrulousness and possibly motivated by the similar twitching of a rabbit’s nose. According to another interpretation, the British usage derives from rhyming slang “rabbit and pork,” meaning “to talk” (Franklyn 1975, 112). However, the possible relevance of the twitching noses of lagomorphs is still suggested by the fact that it is not “rabbit” but “pork” that rhymes with “talk.” Contrary to what might be expected, the Nage metaphor does not additionally refer to someone who speaks rapidly, a habit compared instead to the sizzling of “sesame being fried” (bhia seo lenga).

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

141

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 142

199. Smelling like a shrew Ngudu bhia mucu ‘o Someone who smells bad The motivation is the unpleasant odour emitted by shrews. A feature of shrews mentioned most often by Nage, this smell is registered in the animal’s name, mucu ‘o, which apparently derives from moco, understood as meaning “(extremity of the) snout, muzzle” (cf. Ngadha muzu, muju, Arndt 1961) and ‘o (dialectal ro), interpreted as cognate with Ngada rou, “to smell, stink” (Forth 2012b, 56). 200. Snout like a shrew Kuba bhia ko’o mucu ‘o A person who never stops talking; someone with an ugly face The expression is largely synonymous with No. 198, but because it has a second interpretation, describing a person who in one sense of the English expression would likely be described as “rat-faced,” I list it separately.

CIVET Palm civet • Paradoxurus hermaphroditus • BHEKU Sometimes named “civet cat” or “toddy cat” (both erroneous epithets because the creature, although carnivorous, is not a cat), the Palm civet, an arboreal weasel-like animal, will likely be known to coffee-aficionados as the producer, by way of its digestive system, of what is known in Indonesian as kopi luwak, or “civet coffee.” Palm civets are familiar animals in central Nage, not so much for their consumption of coffee berries (though they eat these on Flores as well) but as consumers of fruit and as an occasional object of the hunt. Although the Palm civet emits a distinctive musk, which people described as strong-smelling but not particularly unpleasant, the scent has no significance for Nage – other than indicating a civet’s presence, especially at night when the animal cannot be seen – and does not inform any of the expressions analyzed below. By contrast, the animal’s distinctive high-pitched wail or whine is the vehicle of two metaphors (Nos. 203, 207), while two others explicitly or implicitly entail an association between civets and cats (Nos. 201, 206).

142

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 143

Unlike other eastern Indonesians, Nage do not attach any ominous significance to a civet’s wailing, at least not for humans (see No. 203). One largely non-empirical idea regarding the Palm civet is that males have more than one pair of testicles. The notion apparently reflects the animal’s possession of scent glands, which can be confused with testicles; and the occurrence of these in female as well as male animals accounts for the Latinate species name hermaphroditus. But the idea of multiple testicles is not essential to any Nage metaphor, nor is another notion – that, through transformation, civets can derive from aged flying foxes (fruit bats; Forth 2016, 127–8, 276–90). 201. Civet (inadequately) covering its droppings Bheku ta’i sesi An untidy person The metaphor refers, for example, to someone who scatters or leaves articles lying untidily about, not putting things away in their proper places. As Nage explain, civets defecate in various places, so their faeces can be found anywhere – unlike cats, which bury their faeces. 202. Civet in a dead Arenga palm Bheku one bobo A person who disdains the company of others The metaphor refers to a recluse who habitually remains inside his or her house and rarely goes out. The trunks of dead Arenga palms (Arenga pinnata), bobo tua, are common nesting places of civets. 203. Civet that wails surrendering its body Bheku noa noka weki A person who inadvertently reveals a fault or some wrong-doing The metaphor turns on the belief that a civet’s wailing or whining reveals that it will soon “give up” (noka) its body (weki), which is to say its life, and so presages the animal’s death. The idea of ceding as well as the closely related notion of conceding are therefore discernible in both the belief about civets and the metaphor’s application to the human action that it informs. In other

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

143

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 144

parts of Indonesia, a civet’s wailing is taken not as a sign of its own impending death but as a similarly ominous portent for humans. Some Nage say male civets begin wailing after they have developed eight testicles (indicating an advanced age), but this idea plays no part in the motivation of the metaphor. 204. Claw (rip or tear things apart) like a civet Legu bheku Someone who eats in a coarse, ill-mannered way; a person who consumes something, with little concern for economy, until all is gone Another, more specificc reference is someone who is given something by another to look after but who consumes it him- or herself. The motivation is a habit of civets, when they come across ripe fruit, of quickly devouring the fruit, rapaciously tearing (legu) it apart with their sharp claws (see figure 15, which shows a man holding a pet civet, with his arm wrapped in a towel to prevent being scratched). The metaphor is alternatively expressed as tolo legu bheku, where tolo means “all, everything.” 205. Scattered (like) civets, dispersed (like) monkeys Bhéka bheku, égha ‘o’a Members of a family or other kin group who fail to maintain unity in the face of adversity Partly synonymous with “goat droppings” (No. 70), the metaphor describes groups of monkeys and civets scattering in all directions when dogs appear, even to the extent that parent animals, according to Nage commentators, will abandon their offspring. At the same time, prosody evidently plays a role in matching bhéka (“to scatter, disperse”) with bheku (civet) and may even have influenced the selection of Palm civets, especially since these animals, unlike monkeys, do not occur in large groups and are often encountered alone or in pairs. 206. Straight like a civet’s tail Hemu bhia éko bheku A person who is honest and forthright

144

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 145

Figure 15 Pet civet (No. 206)

Sometimes expressed as a proverb, “let us speak straight like a civet’s tail” (gho bhia éko bheku; gho, “straight” can be replaced by the synonymous hemu), the contrast is “bent like a cat’s tail” (No. 144), and the metaphor partly reflects the association of civets and cats embodied in the standard composite term bheku meo. As Nage remark, by contrast to cats, and especially domestic cats, Palm civets have long, bushy, and relatively straight tails (see figure 15). 207. Wailing civet Bheku noa Someone with a fine singing voice or a person emitting a mournful wail from sadness or physical pain

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

145

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 146

The metaphor draws on a Palm civet’s high-pitched whine, a distinctive feature of the animal that recalls the sound of human weeping or keening. The second reference is most evident in phrases used to admonish children not to cry – for example, “you sound like a wailing civet, do not weep so” (kau bhia bheku noa, ma’e ‘ita nangi). For small children to cry too much or too long is deemed pie, “taboo; ominous, inauspicious,” as it can betoken disaster, an idea bound up with the notion that a civet’s wailing can betoken its own impending death (see No. 203). 208. Civet’s vulva Puki bheku A loop spliced at the end of a rope, especially a length of rope forming part of a horse’s bridle The artefact is designated by reference to a perceived resemblance to part of an animal’s body (see figure 16). Although referring to knots rather than a splice, comparable English usages connected with rope-work are “cat’s paw” and “sheepshank” (literally meaning “sheep’s leg” and denoting a knot used for temporarily shortening a length of rope).

MONKEY Crab-eating or Long-tailed macaque • Macaca fascicularis • ‘O’A (dialectal RO’A) As elsewhere on Flores, monkeys, introduced to the island some four thousand years ago, are common animals in central Nage and in many places pose a serious threat to crops. Not only are the animals relatively numerous, but, unlike other wild mammals, they are exclusively diurnal, and Nage commonly keep monkeys as pets. Given also their physical resemblance to humans, it is thus hardly surprising that monkeys appear in a large number of metaphors. In fact, among mammals, monkeys are outdone only by the dog and the water buffalo, and there are, moreover, more monkey metaphors specifically referring to human behaviour than there are either dog or buffalo metaphors. In addition, monkeys are used more often than are other animals to refer to human physical features and abilities.

146

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 147

Figure 16 “Civet’s vulva” (No. 208)

209. Dispersed (like) monkeys, égha ‘o’a. See Scattered (like) civets (No. 205) 210. Driving away monkeys, oha ‘o’a. See Scaring off cockatoos (No. 309) 211. Face of a monkey Ngia ‘o’a A person with an ugly or odd-looking face The metaphor is often used in banter or as a generic insult. Usually expressed as “to have a face like a monkey” (bhia ngia ‘o’a or ngia bhia ‘o’a), the phrase

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

147

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 148

was also recorded as a gloss of songi mongi, an unanalyzable expression denoting someone putatively possessing a simian face. A more elaborate variant is “a face like a monkey planting (gourds and cucumbers)” (ngia bhia na’a ‘o’a sewe). This was explained as alluding to “a monkey more ugly than other monkeys,” but what the activity described in the subordinate clause might allude to I was unable to determine. 212. Fingers of a monkey Kanga ‘o’a Someone with dirty hands, especially a child As informants remarked, unlike humans, monkeys never wash their hands before eating. Although the expression specifies “fingers” (kanga, a term also applied to the toes or digits of dogs, cats, and various other animals), monkeys are the only mammals Nage describe as having “hands, arms” (lima). 213. Hands or arms like a monkey Lima bhia lima ‘o’a A person possessing exceptional manual skill The expression refers to dexterity, for example in throwing and catching objects and, Nage remarked, especially concerns monkeys’ ability to grasp firmly onto branches as they move through trees. As is general in Malayo-Polynesian languages, lima denotes hands and arms without distinction, but, in regard to both humans and monkeys, in the present metaphor it refers more specifically to hands. 214. Head hair like a monkey Fu bhia fu ‘o’a A person with untidy head hair Fu denotes hair generally – and in regard to birds, feathers as well – but here refers more specifically to head hair (fu ulu). According to Nage interpretations, someone may have untidy hair like a monkey either because it is dirty and dishevelled or because it is soft or fine and so does not stay in place. Pae bhia fu ‘o’a, “rice like monkey fur,” describes stunted rice plants, the grains of

148

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 149

which are small and few because of disease or having been planted in infertile or poorly hydrated soil. 215. Large, elderly male monkey ‘O’a pode An untidy man of unclean or unkempt appearance Usually expressed as “looking like an old male monkey” (bhia ko’o ‘o’a pode), this may apply especially to a man whose beard is unshaven or unplucked. 216. Legs and arms of a monkey Taga lima ‘o’a A young man who is especially agile and energetic Like No. 213 the metaphor alludes to the quickness and skill of monkeys especially in climbing and moving about in trees. A more complete variant is suko bhia taga lima ‘o’a, “young man who has legs and arms like a monkey.” A comparable English metaphor is “climb like a monkey,” which according to Palmatier (1995, 82) particularly refers to the agility with which children climb and swing on monkey bars and other types of playground equipment. 217. Like a monkey fooled by the sun Bhia leza wole ‘o’a An older man who takes a young wife but dies not long afterwards The metaphor may apply more generally to people who think they have sufficient time to do or complete something when in fact they do not. Leza wole ‘o’a (“sun fools monkeys”) is a standard expression referring to the time just before sunset. At this time, the top of the volcano Ebu Lobo is still bathed in sunshine, while the lower slopes are already in shadow. Thus monkeys observing the top of the volcano, Nage say, will think there is still time to bathe before night falls, but since the sun sets before they come out of the water, they are left soaking and shivering. The idea, of course, turns on the image of the monkey as a trickster (further revealed in Nos. 220 and 225).

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

149

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 150

218. Masturbating female monkey ‘O’a ta’a kuwi puki A woman who pleasures herself Kuwi puki is “to pinch, squeeze the vagina.” Like the male equivalent “masturbating male monkey” (No. 219), the phrase functions as an abusive expression used mostly in anger. Since I never heard it used, it is unclear whether or how often the phrase is uttered by or addressed to women, but it is unlikely often to be addressed by a male speaker to a female. 219. Masturbating male monkey ‘O’a ta’a kési lasu A man who masturbates Like the female equivalent (No. 218), this too is mostly used to express anger or frustration with a person. Kési lasu means “to pull on the penis.” As Nage observe, while sitting in trees monkeys are never completely still and regularly pass the time playing with their genitals – hence the zoological motivation for both this and the previous metaphor. 220. Monkey and crab ‘O’a ne’e moga People who do not get along or who deceive one another Usually expressed as “like (a) monkey and (a) crab” (bhia ‘o’a ne’e moga), the metaphor is said to draw on animal characters in a traditional story. However, I never heard the tale, and indeed Nage I asked either did not know it or, if they did, could not recall how it went. In addition, some evidence suggests that the reference may be to another tale, “Frog and monkey” (pake ne’e o’a), in which a monkey tricks a frog but eventually gets his comeuppance, falling to his death as a result of a ruse set by the frog. Moga denotes a small freshwater crab and, if there is such a story, it will have been motivated in part by the crustacean-eating habit of Flores monkeys, all Crab-eating macaques (Macaca fascicularis). 221. Monkey breaking, ‘o’a sae. See Porcupine digging (No. 173)

150

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 151

222. Monkey carrying a gourd ‘O’a ka’o hea A person who is overburdened or takes on too much Hea appears to be Benincasa hispida, the ash gourd or winter melon, the fruit of which can grow up to eighty centimetres in length – obviously a heavy burden for even a large macaque. Ka’o more exactly means “to cradle (in the arms).” The metaphor depicts a monkey cradling a pumpkin it has stolen from a garden, which the creature finds too heavy and so carries with great difficulty. Generally referring to people who have “bitten off more than they can chew,” in one instance the phrase was applied specifically to women who have children in too quick succession and so give birth while they are still “cradling” a previous child – an interpretation evidently influenced by the specific sense of ka’o (“to cradle in the arms,” or in the case of a human mother, in a cradle cloth or sling). The expression is curious insofar as carrying a pumpkin with both hands would appear impossible for quadrupedal macaques, as Nage themselves recognize. One commentator suggested the phrase could be understood as describing two monkeys, each holding onto the gourd with one or both forelimbs and walking either three-legged or sideways. However, I never encountered anyone who claimed to have seen this, and the whole point of the metaphor may be to depict an activity that is virtually impossible. 223. Monkey leaping from tree to tree ‘O’a baki kaju A person who does not maintain a permanent residence; someone who jumps from topic to topic or does not complete a task before starting another The phrase can also denote a growth stage in monkeys, where a youngster begins to practise jumping from branch to branch, starting with the closest ones and then increasing the distance as its skills develop. The motivation is obvious, and, interestingly, the jumping metaphor occurs in one of the English glosses. Nage themselves recognize the several possible applications of the expression.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

151

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 152

224. Monkey roasting a crayfish ‘O’a ngae kuza A person who does something improperly and ineffectively; “any ineffectual practice or action that does not, or cannot, achieve a desired end” (Forth 2016, 132) As indicated by their English name, Crab-eating macaques (the only monkeys on Flores) do indeed catch and consume crustaceans. According to Nage, when the monkeys catch crayfish they will sometimes insert these in the ash or embers of fires set by humans when firing bush or fields, then pull them out and eat them. This activity Nage describe as “roasting” (ngae), yet, as they also remark, although the fires may still be warm, the action is quite ineffective and the crustaceans remain raw. According to one commentator, the expression especially applies to children or young people who attempt to cook without sufficient fire or serve undercooked food. If so, the usage is comparable to “scooping up dirt, playing with coconut shells” (aku awu, dhégha he’a), which refers to children at play imitating the cooking and serving of food, and is a metaphor for temporary, non-marital sexual unions, arrangements that Nage partly represent as a kind of “trial marriage” (Forth 2004b, 333). Other evidence, however, indicates that “monkey roasting a crayfish” refers to people who engage in any sort of ineffectual activity. The metaphor reflects one of several ideas that represent monkeys as imperfect humans and as readily fooled or tricked (Forth 2016, 129–34). Insofar as cooking is an activity exclusive to (mostly adult) humans, the expression also implies imitative behaviour and is therefore comparable to English monkey metaphors, including the proverb “monkey see, monkey do” and “to ape,” which, like the Nage metaphor, often refers to absurd or mindless imitation. Elsewhere, however, I have discussed evidence for primates consuming if not ash then wood charcoal as a dietary supplement or to counteract toxins in plant foods (Forth 2011). 225. Monkey scolding a pig ‘O’a sawi wawi A hypocrite, someone who accuses another of something of which he or she is equally guilty

152

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 153

The metaphor is synonymous with the English “pot calling the kettle black.” For Nage, the usage reflects the fact that both monkeys and pigs (both wild and domestic) raid cultivated fields, though monkeys do so from above – taking fruit from trees or descending from trees – while pigs do so from below. However, the similarity of sawi (to scold) and wawi (pig) suggests rhyme as a further factor possibly motivating the selection of this animal. In contrast, the selection of the monkey appears more substantially connected with its representation as a clever animal and a trickster (Forth 2016, 129–34) – someone who not only tricks others but is himself tricked – and it is noteworthy that, both in the present expression and a largely synonymous metaphor incorporating the porcupine and the Giant rat (see Nos. 171, 176), it is a monkey that represents a human hypocrite. 226. Monkey showing its testicles ‘O’a ta’a kela wola A man sitting with his genitals showing The metaphor derives from the common observation of monkeys sitting in trees scratching their genitalia. The expression is mostly used in friendly banter among men. Nage recognize wola as a Ngadha term for testicles (Nage ‘ade), so this is one of several usages incorporating words from other dialects or languages. 227. Monkey sitting halfway up a tree ‘O’a pu’u da’a A person who is not fully decided or is unwilling to commit completely to something Pu’u da’a (“source, origin, beginning of a branch”) refers to the place where a branch diverges from the trunk, and more generally denotes the lower part of a tree trunk, from which branches first grow. A monkey stopped at this point has gone only midway up the trunk and has yet to climb higher or out to the end of a branch. Thus an English comparison is describing someone as a “fence-sitter.”

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

153

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 154

228. Monkey that does not cling (to trees) ‘O’a mona kebhi (kaju) Something that is impossible or inconceivable Meaning “to cling on, onto, to attach (oneself) to” or “to be securely fixed (to something),” kebhi here refers specifically to a monkey’s great skill in climbing trees, jumping from tree to tree, running along branches, and so on. Comparable usages include kebhi ja, “attached to the horse,” describing a highly skilled rider, and kebhi watu, the alternative name of a freshwater fish that attaches itself to rocks (see kaka watu, Nos. 466, 467). Accordingly, the Nage expression describes a monkey that is “not at home in trees,” a condition contrary to the nature of monkeys and hence an appropriate metaphor for any aspect of a person that is impossible or difficult to conceive. 229. Monkey that has run out of trees ‘O’a kaju tona A person who has exhausted possibilities or is left without options Tona means “to have an insufficient amount of something” (see, e.g., ola ka tona, “to run out of food”). The metaphor invokes the particular image of a monkey fleeing from enemies and jumping from tree to tree but finally arriving at a spot where there is no tree sufficiently close to jump to. According to one interpretation, it specifically applies to an orphan or someone without kin who has no one to call on for assistance. Especially as this also entails animals (albeit domestic rather than wild ones), a comparable English metaphor is “to be at the end of one’s tether.” 230. Monkey threatening a dog ‘O’a luku lako A less powerful man who takes on someone more powerful This can concern either physical or social power, and the usual reference is a person, typically a man, who begins a dispute with another with little or no chance of success. As one commentator remarked, someone may act thus because he has an unrealistically high opinion of himself. The metaphor reflects the use of dogs in hunting monkeys and guarding fields against their depre-

154

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 155

Figure 17 Pet monkey (No. 231)

dations. Commentators also remarked how large monkeys will sometimes hold their ground against an advancing dog. 231. Monkey with its cheeks full of Job’s tears ‘O’a tébo ke’o A person with a mouth full of food; someone with fat cheeks or jowls Ke’o is the cereal Coix lacryma-jobi. In the first sense, the phrase refers to a greedy or very hungry person who takes too large mouthfuls. As Nage are aware, monkeys (specifically Crab-eating macaques) possess cheek pouches in which they hold food. A monkey with a distended cheek pouch can be seen in figure 17; it had just been eating fruit.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

155

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 156

232. Monkeys fighting over tamarind fruits ‘O’a tange nage Rowdy people squabbling over something As monkeys will fight over many things, assonance has evidently played a part in combining tange (“fight over”) and nage (“tamarind”). 233. Monkeys have their places, ‘o’a ne’e loka. See Fish fry have their pools (No. 471) 234. Monkeys of Oki Deu pull back the foreskin, monkeys of Oki Nage tear at the cloth ‘O’a Oki Deu kési seu kési seu, ‘o’a Oki Nage wisi ‘agi wisi ‘agi People stimulating their genitals or masturbating Literally meaning “to tear a textile,” wisi ‘agi is a metaphor within a metaphor and is understood both here and more generally as “manipulating the genitals.” Kési is “to pull, take off (for example, clothing)” while one meaning of seu is “playing in the dirt” (said of children), but commentators equated kési seu with the apparently more explicit kési lasu, “to pull on the penis.” In this regard, two separate monkey metaphors (Nos. 218, 219) are evidently combined in the present expression, where prosodic considerations have clearly played a role in matching the more euphemistic seu and ‘agi with the proper names Deu and and Nage. Considered extremely coarse, the parallel phrases are sung by groups of men and women addressing one another in sexual banter, thus providing another example of the genre called pata néke. Oki Deu is the name of an ancient village from where branches of clan Deu, now partly settled in the village of Bo’a Wae, claim to derive. Although “Oki Nage” also suggests a place name, where this might be or have been located I was unable to establish, and in the present expression it might be understood as another name for Oki Deu or, alternatively, for the ancient village of Nata Nage. Especially in a view of local history advanced by Deu in Bo’a Wae, the group of the colonially appointed Nage rajas, contextually “Deu” and “Nage” appear virtual synonyms (Forth 2009a), and in the present expression both Nage and Deu may further be understood as referring to the Nage (or central Nage) people as a

156

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 157

whole. Since Oki, as a topographical term, describes a “nook” or “cranny,” in this context it may well be a disguised reference to human genitalia. 235. Red monkey, pale bronzeback snake ‘O’a to, gala bha A person who behaves badly This is a general deprecation, although apparently one mostly employed in chastising misbehaving children or young people. Nage interpretations thus included a person who behaves childishly and a child trying to behave like an adult – for example, pretending that she/he knows as much as her/his parents. Accordingly, “red monkey” refers to an immature specimen, one whose face is still red (cf. “red child,” ana to, referring a human baby; see also No. 239). However, some evidence suggests the entire expression might also be understood as referring to oddities or abnormalities more generally. Gala bha means “white or light-coloured gala snake” (the Bronzeback Dendrelaphis pictus),” possibly a reference to albino specimens, which some Nage report having seen, or, in the view of two commentators, to relatively pale, immature snakes that become darker with age. In another context (see No. 421) the same phrase may allude to the lighter underside of the snake. On the other hand, the composition of the entire expression suggests prosodic factors, especially when it is considered that in other dialects, ‘o’a to becomes ro’a toro. In regard to adults whose talk suggests immaturity, the metaphor may imply that, like children, such people lack the understanding or experience of adults, so that one should therefore pay them no heed. However, the expression can be used to disparage anyone who incites anger or of whose character or behaviour one disapproves. By the same token, “having a face like a red monkey” (ngia bhia ko’o ‘o’a to) is a more elaborate form of “face of a monkey” (No. 211), another common pejorative. 236. Réndu monkey ‘O’a ‘Édu (dialectal Ro’a Rédu) A skilled climber In central Nage, men of the Réndu (or Rédu) district to the northeast – pronounced ‘Édu in central Nage – have a reputation as skilled climbers. A

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

157

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 158

variant of the metaphor is kebhi ‘o’a ‘Édu, “to adhere, cling onto (a tree) like a Réndu monkey.” 237. Sentinel monkey Ana mono A human spy, scout, or sentinel The term denotes a small monkey that keeps watch from a tree top when other members of the troop enter a field to raid crops. Should humans or dogs approach, the little sentinel sounds the alarm (Forth 2016, 129). Applied to humans, ana mono refers, for example, to a youngster sent to listen in on a meeting or discussion or to attend some other activity, to learn what is said or what transpires. Children (who must of course be old enough to understand the task) are chosen because they can appear to be playing or simply hanging about and therefore, unlike an adult, will likely go unnoticed. The term can also refer to a man who climbs a tree or takes up another elevated position to observe an enemy’s advance. Mono is apparently related to moni, “to watch, observe”; ana is “child” and “person, member (of a collectivity).” 238. Struck by the monkey disease Ta’a gena ‘u’u ‘o’a A person who is visibly startled or nervous or who cannot keep still “Monkey disease” (‘u’u ‘o’a) could more exactly be translated as “spell of the monkey.” Defying any simple gloss, u’u (dialectal ru’u) refers to an illness or physical condition thought to result from a breach of a taboo on stealing, imposed by an owner, mostly of fruit-bearing trees. The operation of the taboo is indicated by a particular icon usually suspended from the tree. Reflecting a set of mystical ideas known throughout Flores (and also on the neighbouring island of Sumba; Forth 1981, 102, 115–16), there are numerous kinds of ‘u’u, and some are named after animals. Someone “struck by the monkey disease” exhibits symptoms reminiscent of the restive, jittery movements of a macaque. As a metaphor, however, the expression refers not to a person actually diagnosed with the illness but to someone who behaves in a way similar to someone so afflicted.

158

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 159

239. Unmoulded monkey ‘O’a mona kewe A person with an unattractive, ill-formed, or odd-looking face The metaphor was described as reflecting both the human-like appearance of infant monkeys and the linked notion that monkey mothers manipulate the faces of their newborns so that, with time, they will grow to look like other monkeys. Although recorded more than once, the metaphor seems not to be widely known and the expression – and perhaps even the belief about monkey practice – could conceivably reflect a misinterpretation of ‘o’a mona kebhi (“a monkey that does not cling to trees,” No. 228). 240. Monkey’s testicles Lase ‘o’a A kind of tree The tree is thus named as the fruit are thought to resemble a monkey’s testicles. Related to Nage lasu (penis), lase is a dialectal term used to the northwest of central Nage and in Ngadha. Comparative Remarks on Mammal Metaphors As is obvious from this and the preceding chapter, some mammals provide vehicles for more metaphors than do others. In fact, 63 percent of mammal metaphors (151 of 240) are accounted for by just five categories. All occurring in at least twenty expressions, these are “buffalo,” “horse,” “dog,” “pig,” and “monkey.” Full figures are set out in table 1. As the table makes clear, domestic (or mostly domestic) mammals provide proportionally more metaphors than do wild kinds. The apparent importance of domesticity is further borne out by the domestic fowl, or “chicken,” which, as is seen in the next chapter, occurs in forty-four metaphors – more than any kind of wild bird and more than any kind of mammal. At the same time, domesticity alone cannot explain metaphorical prominence, as shown by the monkey, which appears in thirtytwo metaphors and is surpassed only by the water buffalo and the dog. Clearly, then, other factors are involved, including, in varying combinations, a more general familiarity (deriving from frequency of observation and

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

159

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 160

Table 1 Totals of metaphors involving different mammals Mainly domestic mammals

Total domestic: 162

Water buffalo

33

Horse

26

Cattle

2

Sheep

6

Goat

16

Dog

35

Pig (domestic and wild)

25

Cat (domestic and wild)

19

Wild mammals

Total wild: 78

Deer

8

Porcupine

5

Giant rat

4

(Smaller) Rat or mouse Shrew Civet Monkey

17 4 8 32

interaction), size, and possible cultural factors. For example, the greater metaphoric value of domestic over wild animals obviously coincides with the greater economic value of the former for Nage. But these are matters better left until later, where they are explored with reference to all animal metaphors (see chapter 8).

160

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 161

5 Talking with Birds

Birds occupy a special place in the symbolic thought of many peoples, including spiritual beliefs, myth, and augury (see Forth 2017a, regarding the etymology of “augury” and “auspice”), and anthropologists may particularly recall the prominence of avifauna in Australian systems of totemism, signalled in Radcliffe-Brown’s (1951, 114) question of “Why all these birds?” It may not be surprising, therefore, that among Nage animal metaphors, only usages employing mammals outnumber those employing birds. Some attention was given to Nage bird metaphors in an earlier work (Forth 2004a, 140–7, 180–96), but by no means were all metaphors incorporating birds treated there, so the present book provides a far more comprehensive treatment of the topic and, moreover, locates Nage usages involving birds within the wider context of animal metaphors generally. Of seventy-two named bird categories that hypothetically could be used as metaphors, forty-nine, thus a good majority, are in fact so used, while twenty-three are not. What may distinguish these “non-metaphorical” birds is discussed at the end of this chapter. Below, English translations of Nage bird categories are listed alphabetically, as are individual metaphors where there is more than one of these. In several cases, the English gloss is a simple form of the name (e.g., “bushchat”) followed by a more specific identification (Pied bushchat). On the whole, it has not proved necessary to provide introductory remarks as was done with individual mammal categories. Where issues of identification, specific features of a bird, or Nage ideas about the species are relevant to its metaphorical uses, these are mentioned in one or more of the individual commentaries, and mostly in the first.

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 162

Of the forty-nine bird categories Nage employ metaphorically, forty-six are folk-generics (e.g., kolo, dove) while just three are folk-specifics (e.g. kolo dasi, Rock dove or pigeon, No. 391), but none refers simply to “bird” – as in English “free as a bird” or “early bird.” This is mostly attributable to the complex character of the Nage word for “bird,” ana wa ta’a co’o, literally “flying animal.” A qualification concerns peti, or ana peti (see Nos. 327–30), whose most specific referent is small finches but which can also refer contextually to a larger grouping of passerine birds and sometimes approaches the sense of “bird in general” (Forth 2016, 165–6). But even in this case the metaphors can be understood as having a more specific kind of bird as their vehicle. For Nage, birds include bats, and, by virtue of the alphabetical listing, it is bats that begin this review of individual bird metaphors.

BATS • MÉTE 241. Flying fox Méte A youngster who frequently vomits Méte denotes large fruit bats of the genera Pteropus and Dobsonia. Although the name can be used for “bats in general,” thus as a folk-intermediate incorporating other named bat categories, in the present metaphor and others incorporating the name, méte evidently refers specifically to flying foxes and, thus, to a particular folk-generic. Also expressed as “eating like a flying fox” (ka bhia ko’o méte), the present metaphor draws on the idea that flying foxes lack an anus, are unable to defecate, and so must expel food waste by vomiting (Forth 2004a, 123–4). According to another interpretation, a child who is “like a flying fox” eats and defecates continually, or defecates immediately after eating, or even at the same time. This of course would appear to contradict the belief about the bats lacking an anus, as would a more recently recorded idea (encountered in 2016) that flying foxes can eat and defecate simultaneously (see also “bat droppings”). Nevertheless, both applications of the metaphor reflect the fact that bats remain suspended upside down and largely motionless during daylight.

162

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 163

242. Flying fox droppings Ta’i méte Something that is spilled or scattered on the ground; a person who spills or scatters things Usually expressed as a simile, the phrase apparently refers more to objects than people and in this respect differs from formally similar usages like “buffalo dung” (No. 6) and “goat droppings” (No. 70). The expression is also curious in relation to the previously mentioned idea that flying foxes lack an anus and thus vomit up excess food. However, in this context at least, ta’i could be understood not as a specific reference to faeces but in the more general sense of “waste.” 243. Flying fox hair Fu méte Fine hair at the back of a person’s neck This is yet another term describing a part of an animal’s body applied to a part of the human body. 244. Flying fox’s elbow Ciku méte A man who is sturdy, firm and solidly built, and tough Since in Nage the possessive is implied when a nominative follows a personal name or pronoun, the expression can also mean “having the elbow of a flying fox.” It thus refers to an individual physical feature and, unlike “flying fox hair” (No. 243), not to part of the human body in general. 245. Living like a flying fox Muzi bhia ko’o méte A person who is shiftless and lacks energy; someone who likes to stay out or travel or is otherwise active at night and who sleeps during the day Given the habits of bats, the metaphor is self-explanatory. Because bats, as it were, invert day and night, as well as rest in an inverted position (with their heads below and feet above), one might well expect the present metaphor to

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

163

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 164

refer to people suspected of being witches, who are reputed to travel at night and sleep during daylight. As explained elsewhere (Forth 2009b), however, Nage deny any association of bats with witches. With reference to people who simply stay out late – or “night owls” in the English idiom – I was told that, for méte (flying fox), one might substitute gébu or ‘ighu, the names of two smaller kinds of bats. 246. Leaf-nosed bat Bo dinga A person with flared nostrils or an animal, especially a buffalo, with the same feature As a reference to a category of bats, bo dinga is a highly marginal taxon, excluded from the usual Nage tripartite classification of bats (as méte, gébu, and ‘ighu). It is, however, sometimes described as a “kind of ” ‘ighu (see No. 247), and since few people are familiar with its animal referent, it could be described as a dead metaphor. Nage employ the term mostly in friendly banter, for example when referring to men whose nostrils flare when they inhale tobacco smoke. Bo means “snout.” In the Keo region, to the south of Nage, Leafnosed bats (Hipposideridae) are similarly called iru ndinga (iru is “nose,” cognate with central Nage izu). A buffalo with flared nostrils is called bhada bo dinga. 247. Eyes of a tiny bat Ana mata (or lie mata) ‘ighu A person with small, narrow, or half-closed eyes or someone who does not see clearly ‘Ighu names several species of very small bats (Microchiroptera). Also applicable to people who, from tiredness, cannot keep their eyes open, in one sense the expression recalls English “blind as a bat.” 248. Tiny bat ‘Ighu A person who quickly changes course or otherwise acts in an irregular manner

164

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 165

The metaphor is motivated by the rapid and irregular flight of tiny bats, readily observable each evening around twilight. As discussed elsewhere, ‘ighu very occasionally enter dwellings, and such a bat alighting inside a house is considered highly inauspicious (Forth 2007a). 249. Cricket [and] tiny bat, Cico méca. See No. 497 250. Flying fox jackfruit Mo méte A small tree The plant is not a jackfruit but a similar tree, apparently the cempadak (Artocarpus integer). According to Nage, the tree may be so named because flying foxes can eat the relatively small and thin-skinned fruit whereas they cannot eat much larger jackfruit.

BUSHCHAT Pied bushchat • Saxicola pracata • TUTE PÉLA 251. Bushchat seaward on top of a stone Ana tute lau tolo watu An unmarried pregnant woman Lyrics of a song, the metaphor is one of several where small birds represent human females. A small passerine bird, the Pied bushchat is most commonly encountered in central Nage in lower-lying areas to the north of the main area of habitation, as is consistent with the specification of its location as “seaward” (lau). Also located in this region are a hill named Wolo Tute (“bushchat hill”) and the settlement named Mala Tute (“bushchat plain”), the successor to a former hamlet simply named Tute. What has motivated the selection of this particular bird for the present metaphor is not obvious from its form or habits, and Nage interpretations revealed no consensus. But it is nonetheless interesting that the second component of the bushchat’s complete name, péla, can refer to sexual transgression (Forth 2004a, 22, 101, 214n6), more fully designated as sala péla (sala, “error, mistake”).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

165

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 166

252. Bushchat chirps Tute ci cea A time of day As Nage remark, the bushchat calls before sunrise or very early in the morning, even before the friarbird (see Nos. 347–50). Used as a proverb rather than simply as a reference to a time of day, a more elaborate version of the metaphor is “bushchat cries ci cea (expressing) a desire for daylight” (tute ci cea ola mo da).

BUSHLARK Australasian bushlark • Mirafra javanica or a pipit Anthus spp. • ANA GO 253. Legs like a bushlark Taga bhia ko’o ana go Someone with very thin, spindly legs The phrase is especially applied to young children but is also used in banter among adults. Bushlarks and pipits are small birds with thin legs; they also characteristically run along the ground, thus possibly drawing attention to the legs and fixing these as part of the metaphorical vehicle. In English metaphor, a person with skinny legs is similarly described as “sparrowlegged” (Palmatier 1995, 361) or, less specifically, as having “bird legs” (28–9). 254. Pipit (or bushlark) strikes the gong Ana go dhégo go Sound of thunder A lyric from a planting song, the expression is metaphorically equivalent to ana ja paka laba (No. 59), with which it can be conjoined. By all indications, the appearance of ana go in this context is not motivated by physical features of the bird but purely by the homonymy of go (“gong”) and an unexplained part of the bird’s name, as well as their prosodic effect when combined with dhégo.

166

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 167

CHANNEL-BILLED CUCKOO • Scythrops novaehollandiae • MUTA ME 255. Channel-billed cuckoo Muta me A shiftless person dependent on others for food The metaphor can more specifically refer to someone who gives orders to others but does no work himself; thus one woman used it to describe a shiftless husband who orders his wife about. Motivating the metaphor is the parasitic habit of the Channel-billed cuckoo, which lays its eggs in crows’ nests. Such parasitism, however, is not completely understood by Nage, who claim that young cuckoos as well as young crows hatch from eggs laid by crows and are accordingly fed by crows. Where muta me refers to people who instruct others but are themselves idle, the metaphor would appear further motivated by the cuckoo’s significance as a chronological sign, indicating the time when people must begin working their fields, and thus its characterization as the “great foreman” (see No. 258), a value advertised in all other metaphors that incorporate this bird. 256. Channel-billed cuckoo, you shout a great deal but your throat is sore in vain Muta me, kau ta’a ‘éghe ‘éghe foko o héde A person whose efforts or contributions are not recognized or rewarded Occurring as a lyric of a planting song, the expression refers to the cuckoo’s calling early in the wet season, indicating the time people should be preparing their fields for planting. Despite this useful service, however, the cuckoo does not later benefit from human cultivation as it does not eat maize or other wet season crops – thus the parallel with people who expend much effort in some task but are not rewarded for their efforts. In the planting song, the Channel-billed cuckoo is paired with the koel (see also No. 259), another parasitic cuckoo that calls early in the rainy season, while both birds are contrasted to cockatoos and crows (Nos. 305, 307).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

167

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 168

257. Channel-billed cuckoo, you speak well Muta me kau ta’a sezu pawe Someone who provides useful information This too is a lyric in a planting song that recognizes the importance of the cuckoo’s call for the organization of agricultural tasks. Although the metaphorical gloss may risk over-interpretation, the cuckoo is nevertheless represented here as an agent that “speaks” in a timely manner, providing good news (sezu pawe). Sezu, translated as “speak,” refers to vocalization in humans as well as birds and a variety of other animals, while the calling of birds is more specifically designated as polu (“to call, cry”). 258. Cuckoo above takes charge, moves (others) to action Muta me zéle kéku A person who takes the lead in some activity, especially one from which he/she him/herself will not necessarily benefit Zéle, “above, higher up,” specifices the Channel-billed cuckoo’s call as usually being heard overhead, while the bird is in flight. As noted earlier, the cuckoo’s cry in effect summons people to work in the fields, and for this reason Nage also name the bird the “great foreman” (mado méze), a metaphor that, it is worth noting, has a human as its vehicle and an animal as its referent. 259. The Channel-billed cuckoo has already cried out, the koel has already called Muta me négha ‘éghe, tou ou négha polu The time of the year by which people should be ready for planting Lyrics from a planting song, the parallel expressions again refer to the significance of birds as chronological signs. Like the Channel-billed cuckoo, the koel, another species of cuckoo, vocalizes just before the beginning of the rainy season and the time, usually in mid- to late October, when cultivators should be ready for planting. The song as a whole derides lazy people who do not have their plots ready at this time. In the parallelism, conjoining the names of the two birds with two roughly synonymous verbs reflects not only the similar behaviours of the two cuckoos, but also prosodic effects, especially

168

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 169

in regard to the assonance of ou (the second part of the koel’s onomatopoeic name) and polu (“to call, cry out”) and the alliteration produced by négha (“already,” indicating completed action) and ‘éghe (“to call out, shout”).

CHICKENS, DOMESTIC FOWL • Gallus gallus • MANU The many chicken metaphors reflect a generally close relationship between these birds and humans connected with the former’s status as the main, and traditionally the only, avian domesticate. Fowls are regularly employed as sacrifices, in which context their entrails are inspected as auguries revealing the will of deceased relatives, ancestors, and other spiritual beings. And chickens are always included as part of bridewealth and other goods given by wifetakers (collectively designated as tua manu nio, “toddy, chickens, [and] coconuts”), a practice reflected in several metaphors in which the birds are identified either with wife-takers themselves, married women, or unmarried females destined to become members of wife-taking groups. As this should suggest, to call people “chickens” in Nage has a quite different and rather more positive ring than it does in English, in which “chicken” is, among other things, a slighting reference to a coward. For this reason, I thought of employing the more technical “domestic fowl” in translating individual Nage metaphors, which also gets around the absence from English of a general term for the bird that is not age specific (and perhaps not gendered since “chicken” can specify the female bird and is moreover used in English metaphorically for a woman or young girl). In the end, however, I decided to retain “chicken,” as this is now widely employed colloquially for the species as a whole. 260. A brood of chickens attracts chickens, Moko manu moko pani manu. See A flock of cockatoos attracts cockatoos (No. 304) 261. Black hen (as) mother, red cock (as) father Ine susu mite, ame lalu to Two parties (individuals or groups) who trace descent from the same ancestor or ancestral couple

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

169

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 170

Figure 18 Tethered cock with owner (No. 260)

Although Nage employ susu and lalu for females and males of a variety of non-mammals, in this context the terms are understood as referring specifically to domestic fowls. The expression concerns sharing of common and often quite distant origin, and in both phrases the colour terms connote great age. Paralleling susu and lalu, the terms for human parents reflect the standard binary composite ine ame (“mother [and] father”), denoting not only parents but also ancestors of both sexes (cf. ebu, “grandparent, ancestor,” where sex is not distinguished). It is also noteworthy that in both ine ame and susu lalu, the female term always comes first.

170

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 171

262. Chicken that pulls on (another’s) tail Manu ta’a edo bhédo A person who detains or holds another person back Bhédo, here translated as “tail,” refers more exactly to the pygostyle, the fleshy protuberance located at the end of a bird’s caudal vertebrae and known colloquially as the “parson’s nose.” The metaphor is employed, for example, when someone needs to leave the house to go somewhere but is prevented from doing so by the arrival of a guest.1 263. Chicken with a stunted tail Manu we’o pubu A woman with short frizzy hair that cannot be wound into a bun The phrase occurs as part of a teasing song (pata néke), the complete lyrics of which are: “chicken with a stunted tail, up on the roof ridge, preens its wings, hair (or feathers) like millet chaff ” (manu we’o pubu, mena tolo ghubu, sui pau ta’a bele, fu bhia kuta wete). Fu denotes both human hair and the feathers of birds. 264. Chicken with feathered legs Manu taga labu Someone wearing clothes that are too long or large The phrase denotes a fowl with feathers growing down to the feet, evidently a mutation. Labu is “shirt, upper body garment” but may originally have referred more generally to a body covering (cf. the Indonesian cognate kelambu, “mosquito net”). According to Nage, the expression can describe someone wearing clothes on parts of the body, such as the upper torso, where they are more decorative than necessary, or to any sort of clothing, including waistcloths or sarongs, that are too large. But the most common reference is to men who wear Western-style trousers (now worn regularly by most younger men) that are palpably too long. In addition, the assessment can be contextual; for example, people working in fields normally wear their waistcloths hitched up to the knees (to prevent them getting dirty or wet), so that anyone wearing a cloth down to the ankles can be cynically described as a “chicken with feathered legs,” implying that the person is not prepared to work.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

171

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 172

265. Chickens without a coop Manu kodo mona An impoverished family without a house of its own and thus reduced to living with others or in a field hut. A kodo (“coop”) is a portable enclosure of plaited bamboo in which chickens are placed at night and where hens lay and eggs are hatched. As the phrase can apply to people who live permanently in field huts (kéka), “chickens without a coop” can more specifically refer to people who lack a house (sa’o), that is, a dwelling located inside an established village (bo’a). As a proper name, Kodo Mudi denotes the “ancestral” house (sa’o waja) of the clan Mudi in the village of Tiba Kisa (see Forth 2004a, 90, plate 5.1). Kodo also means “pod,” as in kodo mo, “seedpod of jackfruit” (mo), and further refers to a traditional women’s garment, a sort of blouse that covers the breasts. 266. Chickens of god Ana manu déwa Humans in general as beings who will inevitably die Ana manu denotes both “chicks” and “chickens” (in the sense of young fowls). As discussed in chapter 2, the metaphor refers to humans particularly as mortal beings and occurs in songs of mourning in which singers proclaim “we are god’s chickens” (kita ana manu déwa). Déwa (divinity) refers to the being Nage designate more completely as Ga’e Déwa, a creator deity and supreme being nowadays regularly, although not invariably, identified with the god of Christianity and Islam (Forth 1998, 195–216). The succeeding lines of the song speak of this divinity as “coming down to gather (his fowls) together and never letting any escape; counting and never making a mistake” (déwa ko poi mona be’o lozi; déwa ko baca mona be’o sala) – meaning that everyone must eventually die (Forth 2004a, 190). Except for the different animal vehicle, “we are god’s chickens” is virtually identical to the Nuer metaphor translated by Evans-Pritchard (1956, 12) as “we, all of us, have the nature of ants in that we are very tiny in respect to God,” a usage Evans-Pritchard compares to “Isaiah’s likening of men to grasshoppers” (see Isaiah 40:22) – also in relation to the Abrahamic god.

172

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 173

267. Cocks fighting Manu papa ta Two people fighting or engaged in a brawl The phrase can be applied to two men, two women, or a man and a woman (usually a husband and wife). By contrast to many other Indonesian peoples, Nage appear never to have engaged in cock-fighting as a traditional pastime, but cocks will of course fight naturally to establish dominance. Ta is “cockspur” or “to spur, stick with a spur”; papa expresses reciprocal action. 268. Continue giving chickens Dhemu manu Marrying a deceased wife’s sister Dhemu more literally means “to connect.” The phrase complements dhungu tua, “keep the toddy flowing” (dhunga is “to tie, retie, e.g., the two ends of a broken string”) and alludes to a wife-taker’s obligation to provide chickens and palm wine to a wife-giver (cf. No. 276). By marrying the sister (or similarly close female relative) of a deceased wife, a man thus continues the relationship with his deceased wife’s group and more generally the connection of marriage alliance between his group and the group of the wife’s brother. 269. Crowing cocks that answer one another, Manu kako papa walo. See Bleating goats that hear one another (No. 68) 270. Hatch out (chicks) like hens, Mesa bhia manu. See Give birth like pigs (No. 123) 271. Hen gathering chicks under her wing Manu wodo ‘eko A husband who gains paternity of a child fathered by another man The phrase is often expressed simply as wodo ‘eko and refers to the man’s actions as much as the man himself. Meaning “to gather together” wodo has the further sense of “to protect”; ‘eko is contextually synonymous. As Nage

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

173

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 174

recognize, the expression describes a mother hen sheltering chicks under her wing and might therefore suggest a woman who is pregnant with a child. Yet the phrase is invariably applied to a man, more specifically a man who marries a woman who is carrying the child of another man, often a man who has previously engaged her as a “mistress” (ana bu’e). In this situation people still recognize the paternity of the biological father while accepting the woman’s husband’s claim to the child as a fait accompli, especially as it is he who will have paid bridewealth for the woman before the birth and usually before the pregnancy is even apparent. Activities of hens and chicks inform the English metaphors “mother hen” (someone who is overly protective) and “taking (someone) under one’s wing,” both used for men as well as women, and thus demonstrating that in English as in Nage hen metaphors need not denote only female humans. (Other examples are listed below.) 272. Hen that lays eggs in another hen’s nest Manu telo ‘oghe A person who disturbs, trespasses against others; someone who unnecessarily duplicates the actions of another Although applied more generally, especially in the first sense, the phrase refers to a man who “cuckolds” another, in which respect it is worth recalling that the English word refers to the parasitic habit of birds of a different sort, the cuckoos. 273. Hen that lays eggs in various places Manu telo loa A person who freely engages in illicit relationships Telo is both “egg” and “to lay (eggs),” while loa means “overflowing, excessive, beyond bounds” – here alluding not to the number of eggs but to the variety of places in which eggs are laid. The metaphor can refer to a woman who consorts with and has children by several men or a man who maintains several mistresses simultaneously. It also recalls the general theme, expressed in several mammal metaphors (e.g., No. 71), whereby illicit sexual relationships are depicted as being prosecuted outside of human habitations. As Nage remark, sometimes hens, even when provided with a coop (kodo), will lays eggs in several places – on one day in one spot and on another day in another

174

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 175

spot. Such hens can lay in forest, rock crevices, and occasionally also in a coop, but not consistently in any single place. I first recorded the metaphor, in the same meaning, as manu telo ghoa, “hen that lays eggs like a monitor lizard,” but this is apparently a misinterpretation (or “folk etymology”) of the present expression. Nevertheless, a man who employed this version remarked how female monitors (ghoa) lay their eggs in the forest as disorderly hens will sometimes do, and it may also be significant that one of the monitor metaphors (No. 445) has much the same meaning. 274. Hen that jumps (moves) from coop to coop Manu kadi kodo People who do not (yet) have a house of their own and so stay temporarily with a number of others The metaphor reflects the same identification of chicken coops with houses expressed in No. 265. The expression may also apply to someone who has a house but nevertheless frequently stays with other people. 275. Hen’s egg Telo manu The human calf This can be classified as another term denoting a “part” of an animal employed as the exclusive term for a part of the human body. In English, the “calf ” is similarly designated by an animal name, but whether the anatomical application ultimately reflects an animal metaphor, perhaps through Old Norse, is uncertain. 276. Lost fowl Manu mele A deceased married woman Complementing “palm wine (toddy) that has disappeared” (tua pota), the combined phrases refer to goods owed to a woman’s brother at her death by her surviving husband or sons. As both chickens and toddy are among the goods wife-takers, including in-married women, are obliged to bring

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

175

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 176

whenever they visit wife-givers, the expression involves metonymy since Nage consider a married woman as having become a member of a wifetaking group and no longer belonging to her natal group. For the same reason, “lost chicken” can be more generally interpreted as an allusion to any deceased wife-taker. Nage regard the death of either a married woman or her husband as a potential breach in a relation of affinal alliance that must be repaired or given recognition by the obligatory mortuary payment also called manu mele (Forth 2009c). As noted previously (chapter 2, note 4), representing wife-takers as chickens recalls the identification of humans in general as “chickens of god” (No. 266). 277. Mouth like a chicken’s anus Mumu bhia bui manu Someone who talks incessantly According to Nage a fowl’s anus continuously moves inward and outward. As the expression applies especially to someone whose constant talking covers all topics and accordingly maintains no confidences, it closely resembles a shrew metaphor (No. 198). 278. Our chickens cluster together, other people’s chickens fly away Manu kita wodo pida, manu ata co léla People will (or should) keep their own affairs to themselves (since) outsiders who learn of them will advertise them far and wide This is a proverb advising people to keep private matters private. Referring to a hen gathering chicks under her wing, wodo is explained earlier (No. 271). Although meaning “to fly” in other Florenese languages, here léla apparently means “across” or “to cross (a boundary).” 279. Red cock (as) father, Ame lalu to. See Black hen (as) mother (No. 261) 280. Sea fowl cries pitying itself (or mourning its body) Ana manu mesi polu kasi weki The soul of a recently deceased person

176

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 177

Nage explain the phrase as reflecting an analogy between a human life and a seabird that, unusually, wanders far inland but must inevitably return to the sea. In the same way, “a person’s earthly sojourn is limited: a human must eventually die, and the soul must return to its place of origin, which is divinity” (Forth 2004a, 89). The expression is thus comparable to “chickens of divinity” (No. 266), and just as Nage do not conceive of human souls as actually taking the form of chickens, so they do not consider them ever being embodied as sea birds. In other words, the usage does not reflect any specific belief about souls; rather, the identification of the soul, or a person, with such a bird “appears to derive entirely from [this] particular poetic idiom” (ibid.) – a song of lament in which it can complement ana kolo dasi (No. 391; see also Forth 2004a, 190). On the other hand, one of several places to where Nage say deceased souls proceed after death is indeed the sea. Although in related languages the term specifically denotes either large waders or sandpipers and similar small shorebirds, central Nage “sea fowl” (manu mesi) refers to any sort of vagrant sea bird unusually encountered far inland, and it does not name any particular kind of bird, even less any kind of chicken (manu). As a term occurring specifically in a mortuary context, it may be relevant that mesi, “sea,” recalls mesu “(to feel, express) pity.” Though ana can mean “child, immature specimen” (see ana manu, “chick”), in the present phrase it appears to describe a member of a collectivity and so has an individualizing effect (Forth 2016, 54–6) – as it does in a number of other bird metaphors. 281. Speckled fowl, mottled (or dappled) horse; spotted cat, drawn circles Manu ke’o ja kéla, meo déto uki léke Occupants of a territory of mixed composition Such a territory is divided into fields with diverse owners, in contrast to an area continuously owned by people of a single clan or village. Among the phrases complementing “speckled fowl” only uki léke is not an animal metaphor, denoting instead circles drawn on the ground into which pits of the fruit of a giant liana (léke) are tossed in a traditional game. The entire metaphor draws on the similarity between, on the one hand, the variegated patterns characteristic of all these things – in the first instance the plumage of a

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

177

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 178

bird (see figure 19) and in the second and third the pelage of mammals – and the diverse affiliation of parties holding rights to different parcels of land within a single area. Manu ke’o (“speckled fowl”) also refers to a supernatural being (see No. 297), but this sense has no relevance in the present context. Although the English term is not an animal metaphor, the Nage usage may nevertheless recall English “motley.” Historically associated with the parti-coloured costume of a jester, in the metaphor “motley crew,” “motley” describes something “of a varied character” or “incongruously varied in appearance or character,” while “motley” as a noun denotes “an incongruous mixture” (Oxford English Reference Dictionary). Although the ultimate source is unclear, the English word may be a form of “mote,” meaning a speck or spot. And also worth noting is “mottle,” which the same dictionary describes as probably a back form of “motley” and defines as “an irregular arrangement of spots or patches” and, verbally, as “mark with spots or smears of colour,” thus “mottled.” 282. Stripping (skin off) a chicken’s leg Kou kuku manu Doing something without reward, or getting a disappointing result Although Nage offered a variety of interpretations for this metaphor, the general sense is doing something in vain or without result or return. Everyone with whom I discussed the usage recognized its derivation from the fact that, when one strips a fowl’s leg (the lower, featherless part, not to be confused with the “drumstick”), one finds only bone and no meat beneath the skin. The expression itself is curious because kuku denotes the hoof of an ungulate and, by extension, the limbs of an ungulate carcass. As Nage themselves recognize, therefore, chickens (manu) strictly speaking do not have kuku; hence kuku manu can itself be understood as metaphorical. Recorded applications included: a person who appears capable but whose performance eventually proves disappointing; someone who is usurped by another and receives no part of an inheritance; and someone who contributes to bridewealth payments but receives no portion of the wife-giver’s counter-gift in return. In all cases the metaphor can be used in self-reference; thus a person can say “I (we) have stripped skin off a chicken’s leg” (nga’o [kami] kou kuku manu), indicating that nothing, or very little, has been obtained in a situation in which some return could reasonably have been expected.

178

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 179

Figure 19 Male speckled fowl (No. 281)

Although obviously not identical, the Nage metaphor may recall English “hen’s teeth,” part of a fowl that, like a “chicken’s hoof,” does not exist and that denotes something so scarce as to be virtually non-existent. Regarding the referent it may be additionally reminiscent of “flogging a dead horse,” meaning doing something that cannot possibly be effective. 283. “You” fowl Manu miu Someone who makes serious accusations against or is unduly critical of others

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

179

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 180

Manu miu refers to a nocturnal sound resembling “miu, miu,” which Nage interpret as a manifestation of a witch (see No. 296). However, miu is also the second person plural (“you”), so that describing someone as “like a ‘you’ fowl” means that she or he is inclined to accuse people of wrong-doing – and possibly even of being a witch. Qualifying the inclusion of this usage as a chicken metaphor is a common Nage denial that manu miu refers to any kind of bird, claiming that nocturnal “miu” sounds can equally be made by other creatures, including horses. In another view, the name may denote a bird, but of no particular kind or of a kind unknown. More certainly, it does not name any kind of chicken, and whatever its precise referent the category seems most closely comparable to “highland quail” (No. 397), another term metaphorically incorporating a bird name and similarly referring to an ominous nocturnal sound. One man interpreted manu miu as a reference to a woman who squeals at a man’s advances. Although this interpretation may be idiosyncratic, it nevertheless agrees with the use of “chicken” as a metaphor for women in other expressions. 284. Young cock Manu kako bake An adolescent male whose voice is breaking The term also denotes a growth stage in domestic fowls, when young cockerels begin to crow (kako) but are not yet able to do so with full volume or vigour. As a reference to a young person, it may recall English “spring chicken,” though this can refer to young people of either sex (and perhaps especially a woman). Sometimes used to mean “lacking fluency” (in a language), bake has the more general sense of “unproficient,” “(still) unable to perform a task well.” 285. Young hen Manu moka A woman requested in marriage A metaphor used in marriage negotiations, “to request a woman in marriage” is usually expressed as pai manu moka. Equivalent phrases include pai ipi

180

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 181

bola, “request a woman’s container for betel and areca nut,” and pai wini ngani, “request seed for planting.” In the context of everyday activities, all these items are associated with women and can therefore be understood as metonyms, as women are largely charged with both the care of poultry and planting fields. As noted elsewhere, chickens are also among the animals Nage employ as bridewealth, and while they are therefore not transferred with brides (unlike pigs), once incorporated into this group a woman becomes a wife-taker and then is responsible for raising chickens to give to her natal group and other wife-givers of her husband’s family. In regard to mammals as well, the qualifier moka specifies a mature female animal that has yet to give birth. 286. Young hen or young cock? Moka ko lalu? A girl or a boy? This is a conventional question used when enquiring after the sex of a newborn child. As in other idioms combining the two genders – for example, ine ame, “mother [and] father, parents” – the female term is normally given first. Nage apply lalu to male specimens of all non-mammals, and moka to young females of a variety of animals, but in the present metaphor the terms are invariably understood as referring to domestic fowls. 287. Chicken leech Mate manu A small kind of leech, a terrestrial leech (smaller than “buffalo leech,” a larger, aquatic leech) This is one of three animal names employing “chicken” to distinguish a kind smaller than contrasting kinds. The other two are given immediately below. A comparable use of English “chicken” to specify things that are “small or trivial” has been noted by Ammer (1989, 32–3), who records “chicken lobster” for a lobster weighing less than a pound; “chicken pox,” which she describes as “a mild disease compared to the smallpox it once was thought to resemble”; and “chicken weed (fifteenth century) or chickweed,” for “a tiny wildflower, only a few inches high.” Ammer further observes how “in the 1830s in America

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

181

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 182

chicken feed meant small change, or a small amount of money, stemming from the fact that chickens can be fed corn and wheat grains too small for other uses,” adding that “the less polite chicken shit originated during World War II in complaint against petty, disagreeable military rules.” In current English, this last term is still used to refer to something of little value, pathetically small, or of poor quality (see also “chicken-feed”). 288. Chicken monitor Ghoa manu Small monitor lizard Probably referring to immature specimens, the term denotes a putative kind of Water monitor (Varanus salvator) contrasting to a larger kind named ghoa ba’o (unanalyzable). 289. Chicken viper Hiku manu Small pit viper The referent is a putative kind of Island pit viper (Cryptelytrops insularis) contrasting to a larger kind, but, as in the previous metaphor, the creatures in question are by all indications merely young pit vipers. 290. Chicken ginger Lea manu A kind of ginger (Zinziber sp.) Referring to the smallest sort of ginger, “chicken” is used here in the same way as in the three animal names above (Nos. 287–9). 291. Chicken’s claw thorn Ga kungu manu A thorny plant Possibly a cactus (and in that case imported by Europeans in or after the sixteenth century), the plant is so named because the thorns resemble the talons of a domestic fowl.

182

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 183

292. Cock, male fowl Manu lalu A kind of tree The wood of the tree is used as building material. No one I asked could suggest why the tree is so named. Verheijen (1990) lists the same name in Ngadha as referring, in different dialects, to Enicostemma axillaris or Cyperacus pilotus. 293. Chicken herb Fau manu A kind of plant Commonly found growing near villages, the round leaves of this unidentified plant are pounded, mixed with salt, and given to both chickens and larger livestock to treat intestinal worms, and can also be placed on wounds. Nage do not apply fau to any other plant, and I was unable to obtain further clarification of the name. 294. Chicken rattan Ua manu A small kind of rattan Small and with thin stems, Nage contrast this rattan to a larger sort named ua méze (“big rattan”), thus providing a further instance of manu as a reference to a small kind of plant or animal. In reference to animals, ua also means “innards, entrails,” so the plant name is a homonym of ua manu, “chicken entrails,” the component of sacrificial fowls Nage use as an augury. A somewhat different sense of ua occurs in ua koka (No. 345). For Ngadha, Verheijen (1990) provisionally identifies the rattan as Daemonorops sp. 295. Chicken’s tongue Lema manu A sort of grass A plant that is plentiful only in the rainy season, Nage describe the leaves as resembling a chicken’s tongue. Verheijen (1990) lists lema manu in Lio as the name of Hedyotis corymbosa.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

183

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 184

296. Miu fowl Manu miu A nocturnal sound As noted earlier, although incorporating manu (chicken) the name does not denote any sort of bird or other animal but primarily refers to a mysterious and ominous sound. Also, while Nage associate the sound with a witch out to cause harm, it does not designate any clearly conceived category of spiritual beings. Mistaking the sound for a human voice calling miu, the second person plural, people might be inclined to respond “who are you?,” but were anyone to do so, the speaker and his family would then be cursed (Forth 2004a, 83–4). The metaphorical application of manu miu to a person is described above (No. 283). Interestingly, in Lio ule miu (ule, “bird, creature”) does indeed appear to name a particular bird, possibly the hawk-owl Ninox scutulata, and one that, moreover, is credited with making the same inauspicious sounds Nage attribute to manu miu. 297. Speckled fowl Manu ke’o A spiritual being Illuminating its name, the being is described as a large snake with a cock’s head, and in this and other respects is largely comparable to another supernatural creature called naga. Details are discussed in Forth (1998, 88–98). 298. Chicken (young fowl, chick) Ana manu Larger sacrificial animal (especially a water buffalo) This usage was recorded in Forth (2004a, 90), where I also mentioned kodo (coop) as a figurative reference to kopo, an enclosure in which buffalo are kept. The opposite of hyperbole – illustrated in the context of sacrifice by the Nuer practice of designating a cucumber as an ox as well as by Nage “trough buffalo,” denoting a pig (No. 32) – calling a large animal a chicken is a conventional understatement.

184

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 185

Since Nage regularly pair tua, “palm wine (or gin),” with manu when speaking of bridewealth or other goods regularly given by wife-takers to wifegivers, a parallel idiom is the metaphorical use of “palm wine” (tua or tua ae; ae is “liquid”) to refer to the entirety of bridewealth goods, as in “we wish to bring you palm wine” (kita mo edi miu tua), an expression employed by the groom’s group when negotiating a marriage. As noted, the principal bridewealth valuables are in fact large livestock and, more specifically, water buffalo – hence, like “chicken,” this too is a conventional understatement. Just once I recorded bhada manu, “chicken buffalo”; however, this refers not to a buffalo but to a chicken slaughtered in place thereof, and so is comparable to “trough buffalo.” 299. Sick chicken Manu béwe Insufficient bridewealth, a very small amount of bridewealth Complemented by “palm wine that has gone bad” (tua senge), the phrase can be used to understate or trivialize an amount of bridewealth given, but it also refers to an amount which, though small, is nevertheless sufficient to establish a marriage and testify to the wife-taker’s good intentions. Like other expressions (Nos. 268, 276, 298) the metaphor draws on chickens and palm wine as invariable components of wife-takers’ gifts. 300. Chicken’s beak Ngi’i manu Growth stage of maize The term applies when maize plants have just emerged above ground to a height of about one centimetre, or the length of a chicken’s beak. 301. Chicken’s thigh Pa’a manu Growth stage of cultivated plants The term refers to shoots that have grown to the height of a chicken’s thigh.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

185

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 186

302. Mother hen hut Kéka manu wodo A small hut with thatch reaching almost to the ground, thus resembling a sitting or a sleeping hen with wings resting on the earth (wodo) As manu wodo more specifically refers to a hen thus disposed with chicks sheltering under her wings (see No. 271), the image further evokes a representation of such a building as a place of protection. Huts in this form can be used as dwellings, in which case Nage describe them as especially secure places to spend the night. However, very small structures of the same form constructed with just two posts rather than four, and erected beside a village house, are used solely as places to store trophy horns of sacrificial water buffalo. 303. Cocks crow Manu kako Times at which cocks crow during the night The more elaborate phrase ana kisa kobe manu kako, “child from the middle of the night (and) the crowing of cocks,” metaphorically refers to a child conceived outside of a recognized marriage and whose paternity is therefore unknown or disputed – or, as one might say, “in the dark.” Nage identify “darkness” with lack of knowledge or mental clarity in a way similar to English and other languages (see, e.g., meze, “dark,” also meaning “in the dark” – i.e., “benighted,” “befuddled”). A longer phrase incorporating “crowing cocks” (manu kako) complements a friarbird metaphor (No. 335), and in this context reveals an identification with humans in general. A comparable usage in which the activity of fowls serves as a chronological sign is “chickens descend (from their roosts)” (manu pozo), referring to the time around 5:30 a.m.

COCKATOO Yellow-crested cockatoo • Cacatua sulphurea • KAKA KEA or KEA 304. A flock of cockatoos attracts cockatoos, the cockatoo flies up (into the sky); a brood of chickens attracts chickens, the chicken wanders off down on the ground

186

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 187

Woe kea woe pani kea, kea co imu wa’a zéta; moko manu moko pani manu, manu loza imu zale awu People typically consort only with people of the same kind Although much reduced since the mid-twentieth century and locally extinct in many places, cockatoos maintain a place in Nage metaphors. In three of the expressions below the birds’ significance lies in their (former) status as invaders of cultivated fields, especially fields of ripening maize. The present expression, a proverb encountered in the lyrics of circle-dance songs, recalls the English proverb “birds of a feather flock together.” Translated here as “attracts,” the verb pani has the further senses of “to bring, carry along,” “to draw,” and “to influence, encourage (others to follow one).” In song, a succeeding line expresses pity for the Brahmany kite, which, according to the Nage interpretation, is all alone and longs for the company of cockatoos and chickens but is unable to join them, partly because they prefer their own company but also because they have all gone away. The cockatoo has flown up into the sky (to join other cockatoos) while the chicken has wandered off (to join other fowls). The metaphors are evidently motivated by the occurrence of both cockatoos and domestic fowl in flocks and, although commentators did not remark on this, by their complementarity as strong flyers and ground-dwelling birds, respectively. 305. Cockatoo and crow are the most fortunate of all (birds) as they remain silent but are the first to get star maize Kasa kasa ko’o ngata kea ne’e ha, ta’a heta pau ko’o ngata ulu mewi holo dala. People who gain benefit from something, even though (unlike others) they have expended no effort and made no contribution Another proverb, the expression comes from a planting song in which the cockatoo and crow (ha) are explicitly contrasted to the Channel-billed cuckoo and Common koel (Nos. 256, 382). The former pair are described as “most fortunate” of all birds because they feast on ripening maize, whereas the cuckoo and the koel receive nothing of the crop, even though their vocalizations, heard early in the wet season, assist cultivators by signalling when people should have fields ready for planting. In contrast, crows and cockatoos are silent when the last two “unfortunate” birds begin calling.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

187

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 188

306. Cockatoo’s wings Bele kea A person who changes his or her mind or is otherwise inconsistent The expression can be applied, for example, to someone who, in regard to a specific matter, says one thing on one occasion and something quite different shortly afterwards; criticizing such a person, Nage might thus say mae bhia bele kea, “do not be like the wings of a cockatoo.” The metaphor draws on the fact that, when gliding or coming into land, cockatoos will tilt one wing upward and the other downward in quick succession. Hence the Nage usage draws on a particular sort of alternating motion in precisely the same way as do metaphorical applications of English “waver” (“shake, quiver”), for example, in reference to human equivocation, vacillation, or unreliability. In the context of traditional pugilistic competitions (etu), Nage employ “cockatoo’s wings” in a more positive sense to describe parrying movements employed to avoid an opponent’s blows. At these competitions, men who dance to the accompaniment of chanting (mélo) imitate the bird’s method of flight with outstretched arms, while one group of chanters sings o bele kea bele kea (“oh cockatoo’s wings, cockatoo’s wings”). This is then answered by a second group of men, occupying the other end of the field, who reply li’o lénga li’o lénga, a phrase also describing a cockatoo’s flight and a similar alternating movement (li’o, “to lie, sleep face upwards”; lénga, “to lie face downwards”). 307. Cockatoos and crows Kaka ha A large gathering of people; people who engage in profligate expenditure Somewhat unusually, in this metaphor the complete form of the cockatoo’s name is abbreviated as kaka. A variant, lea kaka ha, “to discard (things) for cockatoos and crows,” in effect describes leaving food for birds that, through their depredations on cultivated fields, are quite capable of feeding themselves and thus refers to people who expend their resources wastefully, including, in one interpretation, giving food to people who do not need it or who do not reciprocate one’s assistance. Somewhat more positively, the metaphor can allude to conspicuous consumption, describing people wealthy

188

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 189

enough to slaughter large numbers of animals, regardless of cost. Including the reference to a large gathering of people, all applications of the metaphor draw on the habits of both kinds of birds of forming large flocks, descending in large numbers on fields of ripening maize, and consuming maize rapaciously, with many kernels falling to the ground – thus, as it were, being wasted. Although crows as well as cockatoos have virtually disappeared from central Nage, people still remember the phrase wula kaka ha, “month of the cockatoo and crow,” a reference to the time of the year when maize ripens, about late February or early March. 308. Crest of a cockatoo Odu kea Head hair that sticks up in the centre of the head, a person with such hair This is one of several metaphors linking features of particular birds with human head hair, in which respect it should be noted that Nage fu refers both to the hair of humans and mammals and to a bird’s feathers. Although the cockatoo is not the only crested bird known to Nage, the cockatoo’s crest is relatively large and the bird is able to raise and lower it. As the phrase is apparently applied only to men’s head hair, the usage may date from the midtwentieth century, when men began cutting their hair. 309. Scaring off cockatoos, driving away monkeys Ea kéka, oha ‘o’a Repelling (human) invaders As kéka is “cockatoo” in dialects to the northeast, the appearance of this name, in place of kea or kaka, suggests an origin outside central Nage. The phrases describe subordinates, formerly including slaves, charged with guarding a territory against invasion or encroachment by outsiders. Cockatoos and monkeys provide a ready metaphor for human invaders or trespassers because the animals are (or, in the case of cockatoos, were) among the most destructive of crop pests. At the same time, prosody is clearly reflected in matching the animal names with verbs. Ea more exactly means “to shout (in order to drive something away).”

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

189

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 190

COUCAL Lesser coucal • Centropus bengalensis • TOTO 310. Coucal with a rotten anus Toto ‘obo mou A person who claims illness to avoid work The metaphor reflects a Nage belief that the coucal, a large ground-dwelling cuckoo, suffers an anal infestation of worms or maggots (ule) during the wet season but, as it were miraculously, always recovers during the dry season. The wet season is the part of the year that requires most agricultural labour, hence the application of the expression to a malingerer. Nage claim coucals do indeed develop an “infested anus,” which they describe as smelling like diarrhea or a rotting chicken carcass (Forth 2004a, 128). Although the source of the idea is unclear, it could represent an actual infestation of bird parasites. On the other hand, a folktale recorded in Lio (some one hundred kilometres to the east of Nage) in which the coucal is teased by a bird of prey for having a “rotten anus” (as the bird is also in a Nage story, Forth 2017a) was explained as referring to the bird moving its buttocks, like a “wriggling worm,” whenever it vocalizes, thus possibly suggesting another source of the idea. In the Nage story the coucal is taunted for having a “rotten anus” not by another bird but by a monkey. Rather than the metaphor as ordinarily employed by Nage deriving from its use in this tale, however, the mythical episode simply reflects the conventional metaphor.

CROW Large-billed crow • Corvus macrorhynchos • HA Although crows – both the Large-billed crow and the endemic Flores crow (Corvus florensis; Nage héga hea) – are prominent among the birds Nage identify with witches, this association finds no reflection in any crow metaphor. In fact, crows occur in just four metaphorical usages and in two of these they share the focus with another bird, the cockatoo. 311. Cockatoo(s) and crow(s), Kaka ha (or Kaka ne’e ha). See No. 307

190

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 191

312. Crow bat Méte ha A flying fox with dark pelage Nage describe the crow as the blackest of birds. The use of “crow” instead of “black, dark” (mite) in reference to the flying fox’s pelage possibly reflects the Nage classification of both creatures as birds. If so, then the metaphorical (or, more specifically, metonymic) name is partly contingent on folk taxonomy. 313. Crow droppings Ta’i ha A kind of tree Also named (lo) dola ha, “crow’s Adam’s apple (tree),” this is a large tree whose wood is used as timber. The motivation for the metaphorical name is unclear.

CUCKOO-SHRIKE Black-faced cuckoo-shrike • Coracina novaehollandiae • CIO WOZA 314. When the cuckoo-shrike calls, only tears will fall Cio woza sezu, lu mata me’a bedhu News of a death always evokes sorrow A proverb heard mostly in planting songs. For Nage, the cry (or “voice,” sezu) of the cuckoo-shrike manifests the soul of a dead relative come to call another to death and is therefore a sign that someone has just died or is about to die (see No. 355, regarding a substitution of the cuckoo-shrike for the goshawk). However, the bird’s appearance can signify other things (Forth 2004, 86–7). According to one of several formulations, if a cuckoo-shrike flies from one end of a village to the other along the landward-seaward axis (zétalau), then a death is indicated, whereas if it flies across a village, from one of the longer sides to the other (mena-zale), then this presages the arrival of a guest. While sezu and bedhu display assonance, the English glosses “call” and “fall,” quite coincidentally, rhyme.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

191

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 192

DOLLARBIRD Common or oriental dollarbird • Eurystomus orientalis • KAKA DAZA 315. Dollarbird Kaka daza A person with a raucous laugh A person who is “(like) a dollarbird” or “laughs like a dollarbird” (tawa bhia ko’o kaka daza) is someone whose laugh resembles the bird’s harsh cry (Coates and Bishop 1997, 386), replicated in the first component of its name. (Nage interpret kaka in kaka kea, the name of the Yellow-crested cockatoo, in the same way, but the two birds are not included in a single folk-taxon.)

DRONGO Wallacean drongo • Dicrurus densus • CÉCE 316. Drongo’s tail We’o céce Head hair ending in the back in long, whispy strands; a person with such hair The expression is usually applied to men’s hair. Classified by Nage as a “witch bird,” one of several species thought to manifest angry witches, the drongo is a noisy, aggressive bird with black plumage. Its most distinctive physical feature, however, is its long bifurcate tail, which informs two of the three drongo metaphors. 317. Like a drongo’s broken tail Bhia na’a we’o céce beta, A person who changes topic “Broken” (beta) refers to the the drongo’s bifurcate tail, which gives the appearance of having been split in two. The phrase was described as referring, more specifically, to a person who, shortly after someone has introduced a topic, digresses or begins talking about something else – or specifically in view of the “broken” tail, something “unconnected” – possibly in order to deliberately change the subject.

192

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 193

318. The drongo has something, the friarbird does not Ana céce nabu ne’e, ana koka nabu mona Someone has something, another does not Nage were unable to provide a complete exegesis of this expression, both a proverb and a lyric in a planting song, but one man interpreted it as an exhortation to share, noting that, according to Nage values, a person (here represented by the drongo) who has something should share it with people who have nothing (represented by the friarbird). Empirically, the combination of the two species probably reflects the similar characters of drongos and friarbirds, both noisy and aggressive birds with raucous cries. At the same time, a prosodic factor is suggested by the assonance of céce (drongo) and ne’e (“to have, to be present”) and of koka (friarbird) and mona (“no, not”). The insertion of ana (“child”) before the names of the birds provides another example of the contextual use of this term, not to specify an immature specimen of an animal but instead to individualize the zoological category.

DUCK 319. Duck scooping up everything Bébe tolo sogho A voracious, undiscriminating eater who consumes all available food One of several metaphors used to describe or mildly rebuke people who are considered greedy, the relevant image is a duck shovelling up food with its bill. 320. Walk like a duck La’a bhia ko’o bébe A person with a waddling gait Bébe (duck) can be reduplicated in this expression as bébe bébe. The phrase may be applied more often to women than to men and was said usually to refer to someone who walks slowly and laboriously owing to infirmity caused by injury, illness, or advanced age, or simply because a person has very short legs. The source of the metaphor is domestic rather than wild ducks (bébe

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

193

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 194

ae, “freshwater” or “river ducks”); as commentators remarked, wild ducks can move quickly, both bipedally and in flight. As keeping ducks is a practice introduced in the twentieth century, the expression is evidently of recent coinage. Nevertheless, it is a point of interest that both English-speakers and Nage compare waddling in humans to the method of bipedal motion characteristic of Anseriformes – an apparently ineluctable similarity.

EAGLE Various species (see Forth 2004a, 20) • KUA or KUA MÉZE 321. Eagle calls seaward from the top of a lontar palm, pitying the father (man) who died before his time Kua no’i lau lobo koli, mesu ame ulu mata po’i Mourners lamenting the death of a man Described by Nage as the largest of birds (the optional component of the name, méze, means “big”) and as one of the “witch birds,” eagles are less prominent in Nage metaphors than might be expected, although the point applies equally to other birds of prey. The present expression forms part of the lyrics of a song of mourning and appears to be motivated mainly by a resemblance between the high-pitched cries of eagles and other raptors and the keening of mourners. It might also seem relevant that Nage associate a variety of raptorial birds and their vocalizations, especially when heard at night, with witches and other malevolent spirits, which in turn they regularly identify as the agents of human deaths. But this interpretation does not clearly fit with the referent of the present metaphor. Although the expression specifies a male death, Nage do not associate eagles exclusively with men. A metaphor commonly complementing “eagle calls seaward” is “goshawk cries upstream” (No. 355), in reference to which I offer further analysis of both. Although the total expression reveals instances of assonance and rhyme, these do not include the eagle’s name (kua) and hence cannot be a factor motivating the bird’s selection as the vehicle of this metaphor.

194

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 195

322. Eagle peering (staring) at a chicken Kua déni manu Someone who looks intently at a person or state of affairs in order to assess a situation, possibly to seek an advantage The expression more particularly describes an eagle perched high in a tree, preparing to swoop down on a fowl that is not aware of the raptor’s presence or attention. The metaphor can also be used to criticize a person who stares for a reason unknown or who looks on without taking action – for example, when practical assistance might be expected. 323. Eagle owl Po kua The largest kind of owl (Tyto spp.) As a term distinguishing large kinds of animals within more inclusive categories, kua occurs in two other metaphors (Nos. 324, 325). “Eagle owl” is the common English name for Bubo bubo, the largest European owl. Although this is a different species that does not occur in Indonesia, the similarity in naming is worth remarking nonetheless. 324. Eagle pig Wawi kua A variety of wild pig As kua in this context has other interpretations (Forth 2016, 97–8), the inclusion of this metaphorical name is provisional. Nevertheless, the pigs were once described as being named after eagles owing to their ability to “fly,” that is, to leap into and cling onto vines and tree branches (see No. 483). 325. Eagle porcupine Kutu kua A large kind of porcupine Nage contrasts this kind to a smaller kind named kutu pudi (see No. 174).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

195

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 196

ESTRILDINE FINCH • Lonchura spp. PETI or ANA PETI, Amandava amandava • BIO 326. Ana bio (finch) moves up and down, ana bao moves to the left and right Ana bio bido bido, ana bao bado bado A number of people working together The referent is provisional. “Ana bio” is heard in work songs, including songs performed while hauling wood and breaking new ground – both tasks performed by a number of people working in concert. In this context, some commentators identified the term as referring to a small passerine bird, and, as recorded elsewhere (Forth 2004a, 17), the simpler form, bio, may distinguish the Red avadavat Amandava amandava, a distinctively coloured finch. In central Keo, the cognate mbio denotes a more general category of small birds, corresponding to Nage peti or ana peti, while in Keo metaphor mbio, as a bird name, refers to a large number of people coming together with a common purpose (Tule 1998, 100). On the other hand, ana bao (or bao) does not name a bird and most likely functions in the present expression simply as a phonological contrast to ana bio. Insofar as bido and bado refer to movement in opposite directions, other factors motivating bao include assonance with bado combined with the comparable assonance of bio and bido, and the overall alliterative effect of the four elements in combination. Indeed, in contexts in which the lyrics are sung – people working in concert where coordinated movement is important – the rhythmic quality of the phrases is probably more significant than their actual metaphorical content. 327. Little red munia up on the side of the volcano Ana peti to mo zéle lima lobo (Referent uncertain) Although the focal referent of ana peti is munias and other Estrildine finches, a status now being usurped by the recently arrived Tree sparrow (Passer montanus), the term denotes a variety of small birds and in some contexts can even mean “bird in general.” Mentioned in a children’s song, “little red munia” is not a standard folk taxonomic name. However, Nage

196

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 197

sometimes interpret the phrase as describing ana peti jata (“Brahminy kite munia”), the Pale-headed munia Lonchura pallida, whose plumage is indeed mostly reddish. 328. Bird areca Heu peti Smaller sort of areca nuts Areca is the palm Areca cathecu, the nuts of which are chewed with betel fruit or leaves. 329. Bird droppings Ta’i peti A kind of banyan tree (Ficus spp.) According to one local interpretation, the tree is so named because, as a parasite, it grows on other trees, its seeds then falling on these just as do bird droppings (together with which the seeds may indeed be deposited). However, since this equally applies to other trees of the genus Ficus, why the name specifies a single kind of banyan remains unclear. 330. Birds urinate (grass) Peti cio (ku peti cio) A kind of grass with small flowers As small birds (peti) are said to use the grass (ku) as nesting material, the name could reflect the image of birds, sitting in such nests, urinating on the grass. In both this and the preceding metaphor (No. 329) peti should be understood as a general term for small passerine birds.

FALCON Peregrine falcon • Falco peregrinus • BELE TEKA 331. Tongue like a falcon (or a falcon’s wing) Lema bhia bele teka A sharp-tongued person, someone whose speech is dangerous and causes others great distress

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

197

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 198

Designating the Peregrine, the swiftest of falcons, the name bele teka means “sharp wing”; thus in this expression the term can be glossed either as “falcon” or “falcon’s wing.” Even so, the focus is clearly on the bird’s wing, for it is not the falcon’s tongue that is considered “sharp” – only the tongue of a human whose tongue is compared to the Peregrine’s wing. Nage moreover describe the falcon as killing prey not with its talons or bill but by severing their heads with its sharp wing (Forth 2016, 258), hence the motivation for the metaphor is obvious. Insofar as falcons do not in fact kill prey with their wings, the metaphor appears to be founded on an incorrect interpretation of the bird’s wing shape, an error enshrined in the bird’s name. As one man remarked, the metaphor refers to people whose words can harm others and even cause fatal illness and so eventually kill them. As such, it sometimes describes a person who issues a curse. More direct and, Nage say, “coarser” ways of describing an ability or propensity to curse include ngi’i le’e, lema teka, “teeth that are sharp, tongue that injures,” and wiwi bai isi, lema bai teka, “lips exceedingly full (containing too many words), tongue extremely sharp.” An alternative to the last is lema ba’i lebo, “tongue that is too fertile.” In the first expression le’e (qualifying “teeth”) was described as a dialectal term synonymous with Nage teka, “sharp,” by an informant who remarked how metaphors often combine a mixture of local and external terms. In central Nage le’e means “bow” (the weapon).

FANTAIL • Rhipidura spp. • CEKA 332. Fantail does not want to agree Ana ceka bhia ngazo A fickle woman who quickly changes her mind As its English name suggests, fantails are small passerine birds whose most distinctive feature is the way they characteristically spread out their tails like a fan (see figure 20). The present metaphor is heard in the lyrics of a song in which, in the following line, the bird is further described as “hobbling to the left and right” (ceka pi’u pebha pebha). This characterization probably reflects the habit of the Brown-capped fantail Rhipidura diluta – the usual if not the sole referent of ceka – of quickly wagging its tail from side to side (Coates and Bishop 1997, 454), an apt symbol of indecision or ambivalence.

198

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 199

Figure 20 Fantail (No. 332)

333. Fantail is present at noontide, (but) the stubtail does not want to address (the bird) Ana ceka leza, ana bama bhia mega (Referent uncertain) Occurring as lyrics in a planting song associating several kinds of birds with parts of the day, the phrases conceivably refer to a person who is clearly present but whom another does not wish to acknowledge. Both the fantail and stubtail are small passerine birds encountered in daylight. But neither is specifically associated with midday, either in Nage symbolism or ecological fact, and while the name of the fantail (ceka) is palpably linked with the noontide (leza) by virtue of assonance, the opposition of the two birds seems mainly to reflect their contrasting morphology. Whereas the fantail has a prominent tail, the stubtail, as attested by the bird’s English moniker, has

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

199

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 200

Figure 21 Man with “Fantail’s Tail” hair (No. 334)

virtually no tail at all, and Nage characterize it as “tailless.” As explained elsewhere (Forth 2017b), the stubtail is an omen bird whose call is especially inauspicious when heard around noon, and this idea is possibly relevant to the bird’s not greeting the fantail at noontide. At the same time, one commentator described the stubtail’s attributed reluctance as abnormal since these birds will vocalize whenever anyone encounters (mega) them. In the second phrase bhia (a homonym of bhia, “like, resembling”) renders the negative, “not to want, to refuse to,” a synonym of the more familiar bau, which is used in dialects spoken to the east and south of central Nage. 334. Fantail’s tail We’o ceka Frizzy or very curly head hair, a person with such hair Hair described as like the tail of a fantail tends to stick or spread out and so is not easily secured in a knot or bun, nor easily combed.

200

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 201

FRIARBIRD Helmeted friarbird • Philemon bueceroides • KOKA In symbolic contexts Nage know the friarbird mainly as the principal herald of the dawn and as the bird that in origin mythology champions the present order of the world, including, most notably, the regular alternation of daylight and night and the origin of death and birth. The bird’s garrulous cries can also be interpreted as conveying specific messages and as possessing oracular value (Forth 2004a, 99). Thus, in a children’s song composed during the colonial period, the friarbird is depicted as instructing youngsters to attend school and become Christians (ibid., 181). Like other nectar feeders, friarbirds are noisy and quarrelsome birds and, while fighting over blossoms, will attack one another as well as other birds. This aggressive character and the bird’s vocal prominence inform the majority of Nage friarbird metaphors. 335. A friarbird cries suddenly, the cocks immediately know (to crow) Koka sedho sa ghedho, manu kako be’o pau Some things necessarily precede others, certain things cannot happen unless something else comes first A proverb that, in effect, admonishes people not to sleep too late and to start agricultural labours early. The first phrase was originally recorded as koka sedho sa wedho (understanding wedho as “briefly, [in] an instant,” Forth 2004a, 184). If not more correct, ghedho (suddenly; see tau ghedho, “to startle”) is at least an acceptable variant. Either way, the expression refers to the early morning calling of both friarbirds and domestic cocks and a notion that cocks begin to crow only after the first friarbird has called. (Cocks of course crow several times during the course of the night, but this refers to the cock crow around sunrise.) Be’o, “to know,” also means “to be able,” thus further suggesting that the friarbird’s cry enables the cocks to crow. Hence the phrases convey the general sense of one thing necessarily preceding another and further suggest that people too should follow the order of nature and, like the cocks, should rise not long after hearing the friarbird’s morning call. An alternative to the second phrase is manu kako to’o walo, “cocks crow waking up again,” thereby implying yet another metaphorical identification of domestic fowls and human beings. The combination of sedho (generally understood as “to call out” but apparently meaning, more specifically, “to

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

201

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 202

utter a brief cry”) and ghedho (“suddenly”) reveals the influence of rhyme; in other expressions the friarbird’s vocalizing is expressed instead with polu (“to call, cry”) or sezu (“to vocalize, speak”). 336. Chest like a friarbird Kasa bhia koka A thin person The phrase refers especially to a man with a thin chest, with little muscle or fat and whose ribs show. The expression can be counted as a variant of the general friarbird metaphor, listed below. 337. Friarbird Koka Someone who is thin but also energetic and loquacious The usage draws on the Nage idea that the friarbird, a scrawny bird whose calls are loud and repetitious, owes its slender build to the energy it expends in continuous vocalization. Variant interpretations include: a thin, longnecked person; someone who is always on time; and a messenger or bringer of news. The second refers to the value of the friarbird’s calls as chronological signs, as the birds always call noisily just before sunrise and sunset (see Forth 1992; Forth 2007b). In a further application, “friarbirds” applies to combatants in pugilistic competitions (etu) who grab and hold onto one another as friarbirds do when they fight with wings and feet. Nage describe friarbirds as fighting with such vigour that they are sometimes knocked off their perches and fall to the ground. 338. Friarbird cries “iko ako” and gets (whatever it wants) with the utmost ease Ana koka iko ako tei noa noa talo A person of good fortune who is always successful in his or her endeavours Heard in a planting song, this expression immediately follows one discussed earlier in which the friarbird is contrasted to the drongo (see No. 318). As mentioned elsewhere (Forth 2004a, 182), the present metaphor is consistent not only with the friarbird’s palpably aggressive character but also with the

202

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 203

Figure 22 Friarbird (No. 337)

bird’s more general use as a representation of a “vociferous and persistently vocal person.” As a proverb, it may recall the English aphorism “the squeaky wheel gets the grease.” Replicating a call that, if not squeaky, has been characterized as “clanking” (99) and comprised of “harsh, metallic whistles or cackles” (Simpson and Day 1993, 226), iko ako denotes the cry of the friarbird. Although talo usually means “to be unable (to do something),” in the present expression it functions as an intensifier when preceded by a reduplicated modifier (in this case noa, “easy, easily”). 339. Friarbird does not reveal the news, oriole has already learned by itself Ana koka mona toda, ana leo me’a be’o Someone who already knows something without being informed As a proverb, the phrases proclaim that people do not always need others to tell them things in order to know them. While the selection of the friarbird is fully consistent with this bird’s vocal prominence and the notion that its

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

203

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 204

cries can convey messages, the metaphorical deployment of the oriole appears ornithologically more arbitrary and mainly to reflect the virtual rhyming of leo (“oriole”) and be’o (“to know”). On the other hand, orioles are noisy birds with a variety of loud calls (Coates and Bishop 1997, 413) that, as Nage recognize, feed in the same trees and sometimes fight with friarbirds, so these factors too may contribute to their metaphorical co-occurrence. 340. Friarbird has yet to obtain anything, Ana koka nabu mona. See The drongo has something (No. 318) 341. Friarbird immediately gets stuck in Koka siba sowa An impulsive person who acts directly in response to a stimulus The phrase is a more elaborate variant of “friarbirds squabble” (No. 343) and, like the simpler statement, can be used in palm-tapping rituals. Siba means “directly, straightaway, immediately.” In other contexts, sowa, here translated as “to get stuck in,” conveys several senses, including “break (off, into),” “prise open,” and “strip, peel (off)” – as friarbirds are wont to do to flowers when feeding on nectar. Accordingly, a specific application of koka siba sowa is a man who, on seeing an attractive woman, immediately accosts her or even forces himself on her. 342. Friarbird that knocks down blossoms Koka ta’a wa’u wonga A person who always shows up when something attractive is available Consistent with a readily observed behaviour of these birds, the specific source of this metaphor is a friarbird spotting a tree in blossom and proceeding to feed on the nectar with such haste and vigour that flower petals get knocked to the ground. Other commentators related the expression more to the bird’s noisy vocalizations and interpreted it as referring to people who talk a lot, just as friarbirds make a lot of noise when they spot blossoms. 343. Friarbirds squabble, Koka sowa. See Sunbirds throng (No. 412)

204

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 205

344. Neck like a friarbird Foko bhia ko’o koka A long-necked person This is a more specific variant of “friarbird” (No. 337). Although not extremely long, the thin neck of the friarbird is quite distinct and, in relation to its fairly large head, is certainly reminiscent of the neck of a gangly human. 345. Veins of a friarbird Ua koka A wiry, energetic person; a person who is thin or rangy but nevertheless strong As an anatomical term, Nage ua (corresponding closely to Indonesian urat, “vein, sinew, tendon, nerve”) refers to several “lines” in the body, but in this context it seems mainly to denote the veins – veins and arteries being more pronounced on lean bodies. As Nage recognize, the metaphor reflects the thin, scrawny appearance of the friarbird combined with its energetic and aggressive nature. In a related sense, ua denotes the entrails of chickens and livers of pigs used in augury, evidently by reference to the “lines” in these organs from which various meanings can be divined, and in ua koka one might discern an allusion to the bird’s “good fortune” expressed in other friarbird metaphors. Particular instances of the expression I recorded include “you have a body like the veins of a friarbird, you are mischievous” (kau weki bhia ua koka, kau maku bhalo), words of anger addressed to misbehaving children; and “just like a friarbird’s veins” (bhia na’a ua koka kema), describing a slim but solidly built person who works energetically. 346. Friarbird ant Wéwo koka A kind of large ant This is a folk-taxonomic name understood by Nage as reflecting the long “neck” of the ant and thus its resemblance to the friarbird. The meaning of wéwo is uncertain. According to one man, wéwo may originally have been

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

205

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 206

féwu, describing the extreme irritation caused by the bites of certain ants (cf. Ngadha févu, “continuous itching on the hands and feet,” Arndt 1961). Koka might then be construed, not as the name of the bird, but in its other sense, as “disgusting, nauseating,” in which case the name would not be a bird metaphor at all. But this speculative interpretation appears to be less widely known and accepted than the one linking the ant and the friarbird. 347. Friarbird calls in the morning, fantail shows (that it is) midday Ana koka polu poa, ana ceka pea leza A reference to association of different birds with different parts of the day, organizing the daily round The phrases occur in the lyrics of a planting song. The fantail’s notional association with the middle part of the day is discussed earlier (No. 333). In the present expression, the association contrasts with and complements the friarbird’s significance as a herald of the dawn and the bird’s association with both the beginning and ending of daylight (see No. 350). 348. Friarbird calls waking (people) up Koka sedho tau bugu to’o Time in the early morning when people should be getting up This is another chronological usage referring to the early morning cries of friarbirds and, more specifically, the birds’ earliest cries, heard before sunrise. As a reference to the friarbird’s call, sedho occurs in another metaphor (No. 335), which the present usage closely resembles. 349. Friarbird heralds the dawn, Imperial pigeon points to the daylight Ana koka ola pea poa, ana zawa ola pea da Daybreak as indicated by the calls of these birds From the lyrics of a song, this is yet another reference to the friarbird’s cries as heralding a new day, in the present instance complemented by a reference to the similar significance of the calls of the Imperial pigeon (Ducula aenea).

206

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 207

350. Friarbird orders, reserves the sun Koka na’u leza Late afternoon, when the sun is low Another chronological usage, the phrase conveys the idea that, by calling at this time, friarbirds arrange with the sun to meet early the following morning since the birds begin vocalizing as the sun is setting, just as they do before it comes up again. Although the sun is represented as an anthropomorphic being in Nage myth, as in some respects is the friarbird, how far these images apply in the present context is unclear, and there is no indication that Nage understand this phrase as meaning that, like a sentient being, the sun is actually instructed by or enters into an agreement with the calling birds. Although others disagreed, one man claimed that the phrase actually describes friarbirds as “making an arrangement” not with the sun but with humans who, by way of their calls, they inform that the sun will soon set and that they should soon return from their fields. Usually equated with Indonesian pesan (“to order, instruct, command,” “to reserve [e.g., a space]”), na’u has the more reciprocal sense of “making an appointment or agreement” with someone, especially to meet at a particular future time. Here glossed as “sun” (more completely named mata leza), leza can also mean “day, daylight.” 351. Friarbird night Kobe koka A day deleted from a lengthy ritual undertaking; to perform a rite on a reduced scale Illuminating this usage is the mythological desire of the friarbird that night and day should alternate rapidly. Employed in several ritual contexts, the phrase can refer to speeding up a lengthy undertaking by dispensing with a day of inactivity that should normally intervene between component rites of a ceremonial sequence. To expedite this, participants pretend to sleep for a time, then someone imitates a cock’s crow and everyone rises and continues as though a night had passed (Forth 2007b, 498).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

207

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 208

FRUIT DOVE • Ptilinopus spp. or Flores green pigeon • Treron floris • BOPO 352. Fruit dove flies down from the volcano, flies and alights not missing a single morning (and) sees a banyan tree with leaves full of fruit Ana bopo co zéle mai lobo, co ko’a mona peta poa tei nunu ta’a li’e wale wunu A person continually drawn to someone of the opposite sex whom he or she therefore visits constantly The fruit of banyan trees are a preferred food of Fruit doves, as of other pigeons and doves. The phrases are among the lyrics of songs sung by men and women while working in fields and exemplify the genre named pata néke, involving reciprocal teasing between the two genders. The verses are sung in turn by men and women. Depending on who sings, the Fruit dove is a man who continually visits a woman or a woman who is constantly drawn to a man. The banyan fruit is a person of the opposite sex whose house (or “tree”) the dove visits each morning or, according to one commentator, a number of people of the opposite sex to whom a person is drawn. The lyrics can be followed by others, which refer to a Fruit dove and an Imperial pigeon together (see No. 353). 353. Fruit dove swallows (fruit) whole, Imperial pigeon goes for overripe (fruit) Ana bopo ta’a tolo beghu mogo, ana zawa dole te’a lala Young people “consume” young people (of the opposite sex), older people choose older people (of the opposite sex) Also exemplifying the genre named pata néke, these phrases complement the previous metaphor (No. 352). As commentators explained, in the present expression “Fruit dove” refers to young people, including virgins, while “swallowing whole” alludes to enthusiastically consuming fresh fruit. “Imperial pigeon” then refers to an elderly widow or widower, without teeth, who is obliged to consume fruit that is rotten ripe (te’a lala). As is common in this sort of performance, the gender of the subject and object varies according to

208

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 209

which sex is singing. Assonance is revealed in the series bopo (Fruit dove), tolo, and mogo and again in zawa (Imperial pigeon) and lala. The apparent connection between doves and heterosexual love evident in this and the preceding expression may recall English metaphors. As Christine Ammer (1989, 161) remarks, “doves have long been thought to be amorous birds, and the adjective lovey-dovey has been used with that meaning since the early 19th century.” She then further suggests that this association “may come from the birds’ billing and cooing – the touching of beaks and soft murmuring noises – which also have been transferred to human behavior to mean kissing and whispering endearments” (emphasis in original). In both of the Nage expressions, however, the doves are described not as being attracted to others of their kind but to fruit. Thus the metaphors have their source in bird behaviour of a different sort – although one expressing an even more widespread, and probably universal, conceptual metaphor, linking food with sex and eating with sexual intercourse. 354. Fruit dove merely makes threats, Fruit dove appeals to goshawk Bopo ugha agha bholo, bopo wito ne’e sizo (Referent uncertain) These are successive verses from a nonsense rhyme, sometimes sung (see Forth 2004a, 195, for the full text). Although also belonging to the genre named pata néke, Nage I questioned were unable to identify specific referents. In the same context, the crow (ha) too is described as making threats (ugha agha), and the distinctive flight of the cockatoo (kea bele li’o lénga, see No. 306) also receives mention.

GOSHAWK • Accipiter spp. • SIZO 355. Goshawk cries upstream from the top of a coconut palm, pitying the mother whose death was premature Sizo io zéta lobo nio, mesu ine ulu mata ‘ibo Mourners lamenting the death of a woman

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

209

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 210

The goshawk’s name, sizo, means “to attack from the side,” an apt description of the hunting method of this fast and low-flying bird of prey. The expression complements “an eagle calls seaward …” (No. 321). Taken together, the two expressions reveal several parallelisms, zéta//lau, “upstream//downstream”; koli//nio, “lontar palm//coconut palm”; ame//ine, “father (man)//mother (woman)”; mata po’i//mata ‘ibo, both denoting an early death; and of course, kua//sizo, “eagle//goshawk.” Lontar palms, it should be noted, grow only in dry, coastal regions and therefore outside of central Nage territory, whereas coconut palms occur in all regions. However, the association of the two birds with the two trees is ornithologically arbitrary, and in the case of the goshawk is evidently motivated only by the assonance of the bird’s name, its cry (io), and the name of the coconut (nio; see also the rhyme of io and nio). In the present expression, sizo io (“goshawk cries”) can be replaced by mole sio, a dialectal name for the cuckoo-shrike, in central Nage called cio woza. As noted, a vocalizing cuckoo-shrike can be a death omen (No. 314) as contextually can cries attributed to raptorial birds, while sio in the dialectal name of the cuckoo-shrike, in relation to both nio (coconut palm) and also ‘ibo, maintains the prosody otherwise initiated by sizo (“goshawk”).

GROUND-DOVE Emerald ground-dove • Chalcophaps indica • MUKE 356. Crop (craw) of a ground-dove Héke muke Breasts of an adolescent girl Usually expressed as a “(having) breasts like a ground-dove’s crop,” the phrase describes a young woman whose breasts are just beginning to develop. The Emerald ground-dove is a relatively small dove. But since héke denotes the crop of any bird (including chickens), the occurrence of muke is evidently motivated more by prosodic considerations and, specifically, by the occurrence of ke as the final syllable of both words. A somewhat derogatory usage, “breasts like a ground-dove’s crop” is one of several similar phrases Nage employ in hunting chants, where they direct abuse at game animals and their spirit owners.

210

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 211

357. Ground-dove and (Spotted) dove up in the hills Zéle wolo muke ne’e kolo People seeking the company of others like themselves The phrase occurs in a song, where it complements “quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands” (No. 392) and where both pairs of birds are described as “living in friendship side by side” and “always traveling together” (Forth 2004a, 184–5). Comparable to the English proverb “birds of a feather flock together” and its biblical precedent “Birds dwell with their own kind” (Ammer 1989, 139–40; see also I Corinthians 15:39), the pairings are motivated by morphological and behavioural resemblances between members of each pair. The two species of doves both belong to the Columbidae, whereas quails and junglefowl are both members of the Phasianidae. In addition, the contrast of “hill” (wolo) and “lowlands, plain” (mala) accords with differences between the two birds with regard to habitat, although since some doves classified as kolo occupy both regions whereas others (the subclass named kolo dhoro, the Barred dove Geopelia maugei) are normally found in lowlands, the rhyme of kolo and wolo is apparently a further factor. In the present expression, “ground-dove” (muke) is sometimes replaced by “Imperial pigeon” (zawa; see below).

HERONS and EGRETS • Ardeidae • GASO TASI and O AE 358. Large heron Gako tasi A person who is exceptionally tall Both herons and egrets are long-legged birds, and this expression is largely synonymous with both No. 359 and another metaphor, incorporating the similarly long-legged waterhen (kuku raku, No. 416). A tall person can also be described as simultaneously resembling both a heron and an egret (bhia gako tasi o ae). Some Nage, however, distinguished “large heron” as referring specifically to a person who is not only tall but also more generally large-bodied, and “egret” as describing a tall, thin person – a distinction that accords with morphological differences between herons and generally smaller egrets.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

211

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 212

359. Egret or small heron O ae A long-legged person The metaphor is often expressed as “(having) legs like an egret” (taga bhia o ae). Ae is “water” and has presumably been added to distinguish the bird from other referents of o, a lexeme that, as a bird name, has evidently been reduced from oro and orong (cognates designating the same species in other Flores languages) by the disappearance of /r/ in central Nage.

IMPERIAL PIGEON Green imperial pigeon • Ducula aenea • ZAWA 360. Friendly (only) with mute Imperial pigeons, conversing (only) with wild doves Moko ne’e zawa ngongo, io ea ne’e kolo béla A person who is banished and thus separated from all human kin and companions Addressed to someone who is told his or her only companions will be wild pigeons and doves, the phrases form part of a traditional curse banishing a person from his or her home settlement. Zawa ngongo denotes a kind of imperial pigeon Nage distinguish from the Green imperial pigeon (Ducula aenea, simply named zawa) on the ground that it hardly vocalizes, making a mumbling sound like a person unable to speak (ngongo is “mute”). Further described by Nage as possessing dark plumage and not flocking, unlike the Green imperial pigeon (which occur in flocks of several dozens), the bird in question may be the Dark-backed imperial pigeon Ducula lacernulata (Coates and Bishop 1987, 327, 328). The fact that the exile’s avian companions include birds that are mute evidently emphasizes the extent of his/her ordained isolation. At the same time, conversing only with doves deemed unable to speak, an ironic contradiction, provides the sort of contrast within an overall similarity that is typical of Nage parallelistic idioms. Modifying kolo (small doves of the genera Streptopelia and Geophilia), béla, “feral,” is not part of the proper name of any bird and in this context merely underscores the occurrence of the doves in places beyond human habitation.

212

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 213

361. Egg of an Imperial pigeon Telo zawa An only child A child without siblings – a relatively rare and therefore remarkable occurrence among Nage – is described as ana bhia telo zawa, “child like a pigeon’s egg.” The usage reflects the fact, recognized equally by Nage and international ornithologists, that Green imperial pigeons, the specific referent in this case, usually lay just a single egg. While this behaviour sufficiently motivates the metaphor, the pigeon’s reproductive habit is further consistent with the appearance of the Imperial pigeon in a myth concerning the origin of death and also birth (Forth 1992, 2007b). In the myth, the pigeon – in contrast to its opponent, the friarbird (koka) – argues that humans, who at this point do not yet know death, should not be prolific and that couples should have no more than a single child. 362. Imperial pigeon goes for overripe (fruit), Ana zawa dole te’a lala. See Fruit dove swallows (fruit) whole (No. 353) 363. Imperial pigeon points to the daylight, Ana zawa ola pea da. See Friarbird heralds the dawn (No. 349) 364. Imperial pigeons alight Zawa ko’a Twilight, the time of day around 5:30 p.m. The exact reference is the time just before sunset, when Imperial pigeons alight in trees to roost for the night. Reflecting the belief that forest spirits (nitu) live an existence similar to humans but do everything in reverse, a more elaborate version of the phrase is zawa ko’a nitu dhou, “Imperial pigeons alight (while) the spirits go down to their fields.” The hour denoted is of course the time of day when people return from their fields, having “gone down” (dhou) around sunrise. In this respect, then, the activity of the pigeons coincides with that of humans – both “going home” at the same time – which thus suggests a further metaphorical component of the expression. Consistent with the idea that spirits are on the move at this time, Nage maintain that young children should not fall asleep at this hour. Parents

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

213

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 214

therefore say to children “Imperial pigeons are roosting (so) do not sleep” (zawa ko’a ana mae nade), and to protect them from harm from mobile spirits, they mark their foreheads with a charcoal smudge. Nage also regard zawa ko’a as the best time to go line fishing for eels, as this is the time when eels feed.

JUNGLEFOWL Green junglefowl • Gallus varius • KATA 365. Face like a junglefowl cock Ngia bhia kata lalu A man with a striking, animated face A wild bird, the junglefowl closely resembles its close domestic relative, the chicken Gallus gallus, a descendant of the red junglefowl that still occurs wild in parts of western Indonesia. One commentator described a person with the face of a junglefowl as “wild looking” (using Indonesian liar, “wild, not tame”) and another as a man whose eyes dart about. Not at all pejorative, the expression refers to someone with an imposing stare, arguably not unlike a male junglefowl and, by the same token, a domestic cock. 366. Junglefowl alighting in undergrowth Kata ko’a koba A vagrant or wanderer, someone who maintains residence in two or more places A synonym is kata na ko’a, “junglefowl alights wherever (it chooses).” Nage describe junglefowl as never staying long in a single spot or roosting in the same place. Thus, if a hunter sees a junglefowl alighting in long grass or scrub, when he proceeds to the spot the bird will already have flown. This behaviour seems never to have been recorded by international ornithologists, but on this ground the Nage report cannot of course be deemed incorrect. Owing to its reputed habit, the bird serves as one of several metaphors for people who regularly move from place to place and do not maintain a permanent residence. A somewhat comparable English metaphor for an itinerant person is “bird of passage,” which, however, denotes any sort of migratory bird (Palmatier 1995, 29).

214

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 215

Figure 23 Junglefowl cock (No. 365)

367. Live like a junglefowl Muzi bhia ko’o kata Someone who leads an irregular existence In regard to both referent and motivation, the metaphor is synonymous with No. 366 and conveys the opposite sense to a porcupine metaphor (No. 172). The alliteration of kutu, “porcupine,” and kata, “junglefowl,” is discussed with reference to the porcupine.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

215

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 216

368. Quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands, Lau mala piko ne’e kata. See No. 392 369. Reproducing like junglefowl in the lowlands Lala bhia kata mala Humans and livestock that are fertile and prolific Nage employ this phrase when making offerings to beneficent spirits, requesting that humans be as prolific as, among other things, junglefowl. In this context, the expression is typically conjoined to form standard parallelisms with “swarming like flocking quail” (ligo bhia piko wio) and “sprouting like riverside reeds” (bho bhia lelu lowo). Another usage pairing the two birds is “quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands” (No. 392). Although both species belong to the Phasianidae, the occurrence of the junglefowl (kata) in the present metaphor also suggests a prosodic motivation in regard to the assonance of kata, mala (“lowlands, plain”) and lala (“spread, proliferate”). The same applies to ligo, piko, and wio in the phrase referring to flocking quails. Indeed, in regard to junglefowls, prosody might as it were compensate for the fact that these birds appear not to produce especially large clutches, comprising, according to Nage, just four to six eggs.

KESTREL • Moluccan kestrel Falco moluccensis (a small falcon) • IKI or IKI TITI 370. A single kestrel Iki sa éko Something or someone just barely visible in the distance The smallest of birds of prey, a kestrel flying or hovering at some distance can appear very small indeed. 371. Kestrel on the western hill flies in circles (and) goes directly onward Ana iki ta’a wolo mena co leo ta’a siba leta A good person

216

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 217

The metaphor occurs in the lyrics of a song performed while planting or circle-dancing. Commentators could only describe the kestrel as a reference to “good people in general,” although, as discussed elsewhere (Forth 2004a, 188), the entire phrase may allude to the impermanence of any good thing. 372. Kestrel with an injured vulva Iki puki teka A person in pain uttering a high-pitched sound The selection of the female genitalia in this context appears motivated mainly by prosody involving the bird’s name and especially the second term in the expression. As commentators remarked, iki is selected because of the similarity between the bird’s high-pitched vocalization (imitated as ki ki ki ki), which inspires its onomatopoeic name, and someone squealing from pain – for example, from a sudden injury to the foot. 373. Shame-faced kestrel unable to pick up a child Iki mea rago (or ‘ago) talo ana Someone unable to properly perform parental duties and who is therefore ashamed The phrase occurs as the main line of a song performed at certain agricultural rituals (Po Wete and Po Uta). An example of the genre pata néke (in which the two genders tease and deride one another), the lyric is sung by groups of young men and women in turn, accompanied by rapid handclapping. The reference varies according to which sex is singing. ‘Ago, or the more often heard dialectal variant rago, means to pick up an infant or a young animal that is seated or lying down. In regard to children, it can also more generally mean comforting a child or looking after its needs. When addressed by men to women, the phrase therefore mockingly suggests that the women are unable to care for children. Some commentators suggested that women similarly criticize the men as being unable to provide for a family. However, according to a more likely interpretation, the expression in this case alludes to men who are unable to engage women in sex, or who, in the English colloquial phrase, are “unable to pick up a chick.” The interpretation accords with the typically sexually suggestive character of lyrics employed in pata néke. Yet some commentators denied it – perhaps surprisingly, as

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

217

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 218

Nage are often not shy about discussing sexual matters. (Iki, it may be noted, is a men’s personal name in central Nage.) During the accompanying dance, women hold small pieces of cloth that they wave in imitation of the fluttering flight of a hovering kestrel searching for or about to swoop down on prey. Although I never heard anyone mention it, the rapid hand-clapping probably serves the same symbolic purpose. Two other features of the Moluccan kestrel may motivate the bird’s metaphorical use in this context. First, like other birds of prey, kestrels prey on young chickens. Second, according to an ethologically less certain interpretation, when people take young kestrels from the nest – as is sometimes done, to raise them or give them to children to raise – the parent birds are never able to retrieve them (or pick them up again). The commentator who advanced this explanation thus suggested that the expression refers to people who have something taken away that they are unable to recover.

KINGFISHER • Halcyon spp., Caridonax fuldiga • FEGA 374. Kingfisher with its mouth (bill) open Fega ngafa A dull-witted person or someone who, contextually, is unable to understand something Three species of kingfishers occur in Nage country, partly distinguished as “river kingfishers” (fega ae) and “dry land, upland kingfishers” (fega wolo), but all kingfisher metaphors refer simply to fega. Also expressed as “having one’s mouth open like a kingfisher” (ngafa bhia ko’o fega), Nage explain the present metaphor as a reference to the habit of kingfishers, birds with long and stout bills, of holding their bills open while perching – evidently as a means of expelling body heat. As this shows, like Westerners (and probably people in other parts of the world), Nage interpret being open-mouthed, or “slack-jawed,” as a sign of temporary mental vacancy if not generally low intelligence. 375. Mouth like a kingfisher’s bill Mumu bhia ko’o fega A person whose lips are stained red from chewing betel and areca

218

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 219

The body part is alternatively specified as wunu mumu, “lips.” Nage describe kingfishers in general as having red bills, although one common species, the Collared kingfisher Halcyon chloris, does not. Betel leaf or fruit chewed with Areca palm nut and lime turns spittle bright red. Nowadays women who wear lipstick are also described as having mouths like a kingfisher’s bill. 376. Perching like a kingfisher Ko’a fega A house floor that slopes slightly towards the back of the building The metaphor describes a disapproved disposition among Nage, who require that floors of traditional houses (built on wooden piles), if not completely level, should slope slightly towards the front – an arrangement expressed as “stubtail’s arse” (see No. 410). Nage explain the usage with reference to the idea that the tails of perching kingfishers always point downwards, thus being held decidedly lower than the head, which is typically held erect. The metaphor is further discussed in Forth (2017a).

KITE especially the Brahminy kite • Haliastur indus • JATA Kites are large hawks. Also denoting a spinning wheel, as a bird name jata itself appears to be a metaphor, assuming the designation refers to the large raptor’s revolving flight. Brahminy kites and other birds of prey (including owls) are prominent in Nage symbolism by virtue of their association with witches and malevolent spirits, and they are also among the most common predators of domestic fowls. But neither significance finds expression in conventional metaphors. 377. High-flying kite sits atop the nest Ana jata jawa zéta wawo sa The soul of a dead person The “nest” is the grave of the deceased, over which the soul is described as hovering. As regards the bird representing the soul, this was previously suggested as a provisional interpretation (Forth 2004a, 189) but can now be confirmed. Although the name of the bird incorporates that of the Brahminy

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

219

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 220

kite (jata), for Nage jata jawa denotes a distinct bird with speckled or variegated plumage, as accords with jawa meaning “strange, unusual.” The appearance of a Brahminy kite (distinguishable as jata ulu bha, “white-headed jata”) can be situationally ominous, particularly when interpreted as a manifestation of malevolent mountain spirits (nitu) in search of sacrificial victims (see chapter 2 regarding the Nage identification of humans as spirit buffalo). But it is unlikely this idea holds any significance for Nage in the present expression, partly because no one mentioned it and partly because jata jawa, a bird distinct from the Brahminy kite, refers not to a death-dealing spirit but to a deceased human soul, indeed the possible victim of such a spirit. 378. Kite sighting smoke from a fire Jata tei nu api A person who sees a chance of profit in a situation and immediately proceeds to exploit it The metaphor has its source in the tendency of Brahminy kites and other raptors to gather in large numbers when forest is burnt, in anticipation of feasting on insects driven up by the flames and smoke. The usage is thus essentially equivalent to the English “vulture” metaphor, drawn from the behaviour of vultures circling over a dying animal. Nage compared the phrase to Indonesian ada gula ada semut, “where there is sugar there are ants.” A Lio version of the Nage metaphor, with roughly the same translation and also exploiting the Brahminy kite, is mbira tei api nu. 379. Of no value at all is the big kite sitting up on the great vine, who calls uttering only harsh sounds Haba ‘é’e ana jata méze zéle koba léke tau ie ghéghe ie ghéghe A harsh-voiced noisy person whose statements are without value According to a slightly different interpretation, the expression might more specifically refer to a high-ranking person whose words carry little weight. The metaphor occurs in a song lyric contrasting the kite to the friarbird and Imperial pigeon, whose calls announce the approach of daylight. Associated with no particular part of the day, the calls of the kite serve no such purpose

220

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 221

and indeed are quite worthless. Although the same could be said of many birds, the opposition finds further support in the fact that not only are the kite’s calls of no value, but the kite itself is a pestilential poultry thief and a bird of ill-omen. Although not affecting the bird’s name, many components of this lyric evidently reflect metrical demands of the genre, notably the assonance of ‘é’e (ugly, bad), méze (big), zéle (above, up in), léke (a large vine, liana) and ghéghe (“[to utter] harsh cries”). In another song, “kite uttering harsh sounds” refers instead to a lone person who longs for the company of others and whose cries express this sorrowful condition; these others are then represented by cockatoos and chickens (see No. 304), both birds that, in contrast to mostly singular kites, tend to flock. In the present expression, ana jata méze provides an especially clear instance of ana serving to individualize or personify an animal rather than alluding to small size. Indeed, the Brahminy kite (jata) is a large bird, as underlined in the present expression by the adjective méze, “big.” 380. Brahminy kite munia Ana peti jata, peti jata A small bird, the Pale-headed munia This is the folk taxonomic name of Lonchura pallida, whose rusty red and white plumage replicates that of the large bird of prey. Owing to this resemblance, some Nage regard the little bird as one of the symbolic class of “witch birds,” of which the kite is more definitely a member. 381. Kite’s claw pepper Ko kanga jata Hawk claw pepper (Capsicum sp.) Kanga can denote the entire digit of a bird, as distinct from the claw at the tip of the toe, designated as kungu (“nail” in humans). The name refers to the shape of this small pepper, resembling the claw or talon of a bird of prey, as does the plant’s virtually identical English name.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

221

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 222

KOEL Common koel • Eudynamys scolopacea • TOE OU 382. Koel coughs and sputters but does not get a single handful Toe ou ta’a ohu ohu mona mewi sa puju dho’u A person whose efforts or contributions are not rewarded The expression follows and is paired parallelistically with a lyric referring to the Channel-billed cuckoo in a planting song (see No. 256) and has exactly the same metaphorical reference. Koels are large black cuckoos that, like the even larger Channel-billed cuckoo, are brood parasites of crows. However, the association of the koel with the Channel-billed cuckoo in this and other metaphors has nothing to do with their identical parasitic habit but solely with the significance of their calls, both heard about the same time of year, at the transition of the dry and rainy seasons, when they serve a common chronological function. 383. Koel, you call in the morning Toe ou kau ta’a polu poa Someone providing useful information Occurring in another planting song, this expression also complements a phrase referring to the Channel-billed cuckoo (No. 257). The fact that in this and other usages incorporating the two birds, the larger bird is mentioned first is explained by Nage as reflecting the Channel-billed cuckoo’s habit of calling somewhat earlier than the koel. This agrees with the fact that that poa, here glossed as “in the morning,” can also mean “on another (future) day” or “at some (indefinite) time in the near feature,” but also noteworthy is the alliteration and partial assonance effected by the combination of polu (“to call [of a bird]”) and poa (“morning”) and polu and ou (the second part of the bird’s onomatopoeic name).

MYNAH Hill mynah • Gracula religiosa • IE WEA 384. Mynah calls tilting its head to one side Ie wea polu dobhe déna A person experiencing anguish at someone’s death

222

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 223

One of several bird metaphors included in songs of mourning, according to Nage dobhe déna refers to the Hill mynah’s habit of tilting and turning its head from side to side while vocalizing (Dobhe, “slant, slope,” and déna, “flat, level,” are combined to denote this alternating movement). How this relates to human anguish is less clear, although the bird’s habit could conceivably be associated with movements of the human head indicative of bewilderment or despair at news of the death of someone close. Unlike several other birds mentioned in mourning songs, Nage do not regard the mynah’s call as a death omen. The Hill mynah, whose name is alternatively pronounced as io wea, is also mentioned in a planting song (Forth 2004a, 191) as the complement of the Bare-throated whistler (kete dhéngi, see No. 418) – a connection consistent with the occurrence of both birds high in the forest canopy in elevated locations and also with the fact that both possess a range of vocalizations and are capable mimics. The mynah, of course, is a bird that can be trained to imitate human speech.

ORIOLE Black-naped oriole • Oriolus chinensis • LEO or LEO TE’A 385. Oriole has already learned by itself, Ana leo me’a be’o. See Friarbird does not reveal the news (No. 339) 386. Oriole fish Ika leo (ika léro) A grunter Mesopristes sp. The fish is mostly yellow, like the feathers of the oriole, for Nage the epitome of birds with yellow plumage. Here leo is alternatively rendered by dialectal léro, as it is in No. 387. 387. Oriole python Goka leo Timorese python Python timorensis Nage recognize the snake as being named after alternating yellow and black markings, resembling those of the Black-naped oriole. TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

223

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 224

Figure 24 Injured Black-naped oriole (No. 387)

388. Oriole gourd Hea leo A kind of cultivated gourd So named because the skin is of a yellow colour, this is one of several named kinds of hea (“gourd, pumpkin, vegetable marrow”).

OWL Various species of Strigidae and Tytonidae • PO and JE 389. Large owl Po kua A person who pulls a garment or blanket over the head to keep warm

224

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 225

Nage classification of owls, generally named po, is discussed in Forth (2004a, 61–79). Owls are the focal member of the symbolic class of “witch birds,” a category that also includes diurnal birds of prey, crows, and drongoes. The present usage, however, draws solely on a physical resemblance, and a person huddled up and covering the head, hair, and ears with clothing or a blanket and with only face and eyes exposed can, indeed, look “like a large owl” (bhia ko’o po kua). Po kua (kua is “eagle”) denotes the largest of owls known to Nage, probably most often a Barn owl (Tyto alba or T. longimembris), which unlike species of Otus lacks “ear” tufts or “horns.” Nowadays the metaphor is often applied to people who cover their heads with hoods attached to modern jackets or wear balaclavas. 390. Hawk-owl pretends to be close, advances pretending Je podi we’e A person who feigns friendship with someone in order to take advantage Je may refer to the Brown hawk-owl Ninox scutulata. Besides the name of a bird, je means “to advance slowly.” The metaphor describes the reputed behaviour of the owl, described by Nage as alighting near roosting fowls and gradually sidling up to chickens in order to seize one, all the while imitating the piping of a chick. Applied to humans, the metaphor can refer, for example, to a man who becomes friendly with a woman to obtain sexual favours. In the ‘Ua region, in the eastern part of central Nage, what is apparently the same bird is called po wése (po, “owl”) or wése je, and the second term is used metaphorically to describe a person behaving in the same way.

PIGEON Rock dove • Columba livia • KOLO DASI 391. Pigeon down by the ocean waves at Mbai Ana kolo dasi lau bata Bai The soul of someone recently deceased The expression occurs in a mourning song, where it precedes and complements “sea fowl cries pitying itself ” (No. 280). Nage mostly understand the lyric as referring to a dead soul, in which respect it recalls Christian representations of the Holy Ghost and the human soul as assuming the form of a

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

225

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 226

dove (see, e.g., Luke 3:22; Mathew 3:16). Among Nage, however, many birds besides pigeons and doves are considered manifestations of souls or are otherwise associated with souls. The same species that abounds in Western cities, the Rock dove, or “domestic pigeon,” is introduced in eastern Indonesia, but how long it has been present is unclear. Nage suggested that dasi is inserted after kolo to correspond with Bai, a location on Flores’s north coast. But, arguably, this makes sense only by virtue of the resemblance of dasi and tasi, a contextual reference to the sea, which is consistent with the location of the bird “by the ocean waves at Mbai.”

QUAIL Various species • PIKO or BEWU Nearly all metaphors referring to quails name the bird piko, a term specifically denoting the Brown quail Coturnix ypsilophora but also naming a more general category (or “folk-intermediate,” sensu Berlin 1992) that further includes the separately named Blue-breasted quail Coturnix chinensis (Nage mulu ki) and Buttonquails Turnix spp. (Nage bewu). As only one metaphor employs bewu (“buttonquail”), I have listed this with the others below. Nage describe quails (piko) as very short-tailed or even tailless birds and as birds that can never alight in trees. The origin of these traits is the topic of two traditional Nage narratives, yet neither motivates any Nage quail metaphor. 392. Quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands Lau mala piko ne’e kata People seek(ing) the company of others like themselves This metaphor is discussed earlier, with reference to the complementary expression “Ground-dove and (Spotted) dove up in the hills” (No. 357). 393. Quail that invites others along, dove that urges on friends Piko ta’a wito io, kolo ta’a ‘isi moko A person who seeks companionship or support of others of the same kind Forming part of a proverb, the metaphor is motivated by the flocking habits of quails and doves. However, it is also noteworthy that piko kolo (“quails

226

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 227

[and] doves”) is a standard composite denoting valued game birds that also do harm to crops; similarly “quails [and] rats” (piko dhéke) is a collective reference to various avian and mammalian crop pests. At the same time, prosody is evident in the assonance of piko, wito, and io and, in the complementary expression, kolo and moko (“friend, companion”). 394. Quails set down, piko bebe. See Doves fly away (No. 402) 395. Short quail Piko pada A person who is short and squat Quails are of course small, round, plump birds. Nage apply the phrase only to adults, not to children (unlike “small porcupine,” No. 174). Pada, “short, squat,” does not occur in the folk taxonomic name of any sort of quail or other bird, and in this expression serves only to emphasize the attribute of quails that renders them an appropriate metaphor for people of a certain body type. 396. Swarming like flocking quail, Ligo bhia piko wio. See Reproducing like junglefowl (No. 369) Ligo is sometimes replaced by synonymous ligho. The only meaning for wio commentators could identify was “Sumba (Island), Sumbanese.” As this makes no sense in the present context, the term may be inserted simply for metrical reasons. On the other hand, in ‘Ua, towards the eastern boundary of central Nage, wio occurs as the name of a passerine bird, possibly the Golden whistler Pachycephala pectoralis. 397. Highland quail Piko du’a A nocturnal sound Although piko du’a straightforwardly translates as “highland quail,” Nage do not definitely conceive of this entity, known only by its nocturnal call, as either a kind of quail or a bird of any sort. The call gives warning that a thief is about, looking to steal livestock, so that upon hearing it people should take ritual and practical preventative measures (Forth 2004a, 102).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

227

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 228

398. Buttonquail bean Hobho bewu A kind of string bean The cultivar is thus named, according to Nage, because markings on the small, multicoloured beans resemble those on the eggs of Buttonquails (Turnix spp.). 399. Quail bone(s) Toko piko A kind of grass; a vine The name refers to two plants: a kind of grass with edible leaves consumed cooked or raw and a thorny vine. The motivation is the thinness of the stems.

SCRUBFOWL Orange-footed scrubfowl • Megapodius reinwart • KOKO WODO 400. Scrubfowl that lays eggs but always leaves them behind Koko wodo telo ea telo ea A woman who bears children she does not raise, leaving them to the care of others A megapode, the Orange-footed scrubfowl lays its unusually large eggs underneath a large mound of earth and plant litter, the heat from which incubates them. Unlike other birds, therefore, the female scrubfowl does not sit on a clutch and, since several hens will lay eggs under the same mound, there are in fact no single nests. The behaviour is at least partially known to Nage, who describe the scrubfowl as “laying eggs on the ground but hatching them in (or from) a tree,” and as “knowing how to lay eggs but not knowing how to brood them” (telo be’o neke kéwo). Accordingly, Nage remark that whenever one comes across the bird, usually after hearing its calls, it is always sitting in a tree. Other ideas apparently relevant to the metaphor include the claim that a hen scrubfowl with eggs will gradually descend from its tree and that when it reaches the ground this means that the young have already hatched and are about to leave the nest mound. By then, the chicks are already quite large;

228

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 229

they are also relatively independent and do not follow the parent birds when searching for food. Instead, they look for food by themselves, and, Nage further assert, the mother birds will peck at young to ensure that they do so. The image of the scrubfowl as a poor parent is also found on Sumba, where “to have (raise) children like a scrubfowl (kaluki)” (paana kalukingu) describes people who do not look after their offspring by reference to the same nesting and egg-laying behaviour observed by the Nage (Forth 2000, 189). At present scrubfowl are rare in central Nage and apparently have always been more common in coastal regions. According to an evidently more fantastic idea, when scrubfowl eggs hatch those hatchlings that head in the direction of the sea become sea creatures. But this seems only to apply to scrubfowl found near the south coast. In coastal regions throughout Flores, a variant of this idea applies to sea turtles, whose hatchlings that turn towards dry land are said to become monitors, snakes, rats, and other non-marine creatures. Apparently relevant to this widespread belief is the fact that, like scrubfowl, sea turtles, after laying eggs in holes dug in sandy beaches, similarly leave the eggs to hatch on their own. In Lio, the scrubfowl is called manu wodo, thus incorporating manu, otherwise meaning “chicken” as in Nage. Wodo also occurs in three Nage metaphors incorporating the domestic fowl (Nos. 271, 278, 302). However, as the name of the scrubfowl, the term may have a different derivation (cf. e.g., Sumbanese wundu, “scrubfowl”), and in any case neither Lio nor Nage regard the bird as a kind of “chicken.” In the Nage name, koko is considered onomatopoeic. Although it cannot unambiguously be called a “totem,” the scrubfowl has a special association with a section of the Nage clan Mude (Forth 2004, 199a), a clan partly resident in ‘Ua (where I first recorded the present metaphor) and otherwise settled in villages not far from ‘Ua.

SPOTTED DOVE • Streptopelia chinensis and BARRED DOVE • Geopelia maugei • KOLO 401. Dove looking at a pool of water Kolo moni ae Someone who is present at some undertaking but does not actively participate or does not do so immediately

229

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 230

Figure 25 Young Barred doves (No. 401)

The phrase describes a thirsty dove that will not descend to drink at a pool of water but remains perched for a time until it feels that it is safe to do so. The expression refers, for example, to people who attend a discussion but do not speak or remain silent for a while before participating. Nage kolo denotes not only the Spotted dove (distinguishable as kolo méze, “big kolo”) but also the Barred dove Geopelia maugei (kolo dhoro or kolo ghodho). Related terms in other eastern Indonesian languages refer to birds more generally (Forth 2006), a sense also suggested by the Nage composite peti kolo, which is similarly used for birds in general. In fact, this broader sense is implicit in the

230

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 231

present metaphor, since not just doves but birds of many kinds will hesitate before flying to the ground to drink or feed. 402. Doves fly away, quails set down Kolo co, piko bebe One person or family abandons a field, after which another begins cultivating there An alternative to the second phrase is piko begu, “quails alight (on the ground).” The metaphor reflects a comparison of one kind of bird setting down in a place previously occupied by a bird of another kind with different groups of people who successively cultivate a plot. Apart from the association of doves and quails enshrined in the standard composite piko kolo, the association of the two birds in the present metaphor is evidently motivated by their largely common habitats and the fact that both feed on grain, as do human cultivators who successively occupy the same plot. Bebe, also meaning “to fall to the ground (e.g., of a person knocked down),” refers to birds alighting on the ground – in contrast to ko’a, which means “alighting in a tree, on a branch.”2 403. Ground-dove and (Spotted) dove up in the hills, Zéle wolo muke ne’e kolo. See No. 357 404. (Spotted) dove coos from up on the volcano, sees Job’s tears of people on the hillsides of Geo Kolo ku zéle mai lobo, tei ke’o ko’o ata lebi Geo A woman trying vainly to attract a man Exemplifying the genre called pata néke, teasing allusions directed to members of the opposite sex, the phrases are heard in planting songs. Nage identify the dove as a metaphorical reference to a woman, and Job’s tears as a man or men she is trying to attract. Geo (a region to the northeast of central Nage) appears to be motivated only by its rhyming with ke’o. Pronounced similarly to English “coo,” Nage ku refers specifically to the calls of doves named kolo but has the further sense of “to express self-pity.” This second sense may be present in énga ku, a phrase referring to a public announcement (énga is “to call summon”) typically made from an elevated location – thus sometimes

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

231

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 232

glossed as “calling from the mountain” – and declaring one’s troubles or making a complaint. The possible relevance of this practice to the present expression is indicated by the dove “cooing” (or calling) “from up on the volcano.” However, ku in énga ku is also interpreted as referring to the group of people, the masses as it were, to whom the announcement is addressed. 405. Dove that urges on friends, Kolo ta’a ‘isi moko. See Quail that invites others along (No. 393) 406. Weeping like a dove cooing Nangi bhia kolo ku To cry over, bemoan a (material) loss; to engage in self pity The phrase specifically describes someone bemoaning a loss of goods, or livestock that have died or been stolen, or being short of food owing to crop failure, and not, for example, the loss of a relative who has died. 407. Dove coconut Nio kolo A kind of coconut palm Contrasting with “buffalo coconut” (No. 25; see Figure 2) and other varieties, the palm is so named, according to Nage, because the nut is smaller than other coconuts, just as these small doves are smaller than other Columbiformes and other creatures generally. 408. Dove droppings Ta’i kolo A kind of cosh used in pugilistic competitions (etu) Made of buffalo hide wrapped in black palm fibre and light-coloured twine, the elliptical implements, in central Nage more often named named kepo (a term also meaning “[to make a] fist”) are held in the hand and used to strike opponents (see figure 26). Nage disagreed about the possible motivation: some thought it might reflect a similarity of colour between the cosh and bird droppings, others mentioned a similarity of shape. In either case, kolo in this context may have the more general sense of “bird.”

232

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 233

Figure 26 “Dove droppings” (No. 408)

STUBTAIL Russet-capped stubtail (or tesia) • Tesia everetti • BAMA or BAMA CEA 409. Stubtail does not want to address (someone), Ana bama bhia mega. See Fantail is present at noontide (No. 333) 410. Stubtail’s arse Bui bama A house floor that slopes slightly towards the front of the building

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

233

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 234

This is the preferred disposition among Nage and the opposite of the arrangement called “perching like a kingfisher” (No. 376). That the little bird serves as the model reflects the Nage claim that, apart from being “tailless” (the bird in fact has a very short tail), the stubtail commonly perches and flies with its head – in the metaphor corresponding to the front of a house – held slightly lower than its rear (Forth 2017a).

SUNBIRD • Nectarinia spp. • TIWE or TIWE TE’A 411. One-eyed sunbird Tiwe mata gibe A young woman ambivalent about a man’s advances Sunbirds are the smallest birds known to Nage. Tiwe includes the Olivebacked sunbird N. jugularis and the Flame-breasted sunbird N. solaris. Besides “one-eyed” – in the sense of having one eye damaged or missing – gibe also refers to having an eye closed, for example from dried eye rheum, and more generally to impaired vision. The metaphor occurs in a song performed by males teasing (néke) females that describes the “sunbird” (the woman) as sitting in a tree (a dwelling that the man wishes to enter) but being overcome by smoke (understood as false flattery) and therefore alternatively opening and closing her eyes, interpreted in this context as an expression of ambivalence. Although most Nage I questioned rejected it, I am still not certain that a previous interpretation of “one-eyed sunbird” as a more specific reference to the female genitalia (Forth 2004a, 194) – described as alternately responsive and unresponsive to a man endeavouring to “gain entry” – is entirely mistaken. 412. Sunbirds throng, friarbirds squabble Tiwe mole, koka sowa People enjoying an abundance of palm juice Like friarbirds, sunbirds are nectar feeders. The phrase is one of several that complement “deer bathe” (No. 163) in rites associated with the tapping of Arenga palms and expresses the desire that palms produce an abundance of palm juice – so much that both sorts of birds will be attracted in large num-

234

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 235

bers. Sunbirds are then envisioned as swarming over the juice and friarbirds, as is their wont, as squabbling noisily over the bonanza. The sunbird and the friarbird are further associated in an origin myth, where the small but plucky sunbird rescues the friarbird after the larger bird is captured by his opponent, the Imperial pigeon (Forth 2004a, 127; Forth 2007b, 505–6). The sunbird’s association with the Arenga palm also informs a Nage story (Forth 2004a, 150) recounting how people first discovered sweettasting toddy and began tapping palms after a large bamboo, swaying in the wind, accidently rubbed against an Arenga palm stalk growing close by. Soon afterwards a sunbird dropped blossoms from the ko’u tree (possibly Melochia umbellata), a fermenting agent, into a container full of the juice.

SWALLOWS and SWIFTS • Hirundidae and Apodidae • EBU TITU 413. Swallows and swifts command the months (seasons); Swallows and swifts wander the sky Ebu titu watu wula; Ebu titu leo lizu The wet season is approaching, the rains are near The two expressions are metaphorically synonymous. Ebu titu equally designates swallows and swifts, birds that, although belonging to different ornithological families, are similar in form and behaviour, a product of convergent evolution. Lyrics in songs, including planting songs, the present phrase refers to the birds’ significance as signs of rain, owing to the regular appearance of flights of swifts and swallows towards the end of the dry season. For the same reason, the birds are alternatively named awe uza, “rain summoner,” or ana uza, “rain creature,” and songs mentioning the birds additionally refer to the sounds of distant thunder, expressed metaphorically as “a young horse beating the drum” (No. 59) and “Mother Red striking the gong.” (“Mother Red” is a synonym of “Mother Géna,” a female personification of rain.) “Commands the months” implies that, by signalling the approach or beginning of the rainy season – the northwest monsoon lasting from October or November to April or May in Nage country – the birds determine the course of the year and the division of wet and dry months.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

235

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 236

UNIDENTIFIED BIRDS 414. A large hawk Wole wa A person holding the arms perpendicular to the body (especially when dancing) Translating as “plays with (the) wind,” as a bird name wole wa may be synonymous with jata jawa (see No. 377). “To dance like (a) wole wa” describes a method of dancing with the arms outstretched like a hovering raptor. 415. A small bird Witu tui Someone who is excessively nervous or unbalanced; boisterous and unruly young children Referring in part to people who act “crazy” (bingu or bingu titu), the metaphor reflects the Nage idea that birds onomatopoically named witu tui – possibly the great tit Parus major or a brush cuckoo – pick up human head hair, either clippings or strands of combed hair, to take to their nests or otherwise to the tops of tall trees, and that this causes the hair’s owner to become mentally deranged (Forth 2004a,102–3). Children behaving “wildly” are likely to be described as “like ana witu tui,” where ana can be understood either as a specific reference to children or to the bird’s small size. As a reference to derangement, the metaphor may recall English “cuckoo” in the sense of “foolish, demented, or insane” (Palmatier 1995, 105), and it is therefore worth noting that, according to some evidence, witu tui may partly denote a cuckoo of the genus Cacomantis (Forth 2004a, 129; also Coates and Bishop 1997, 348–9, who list both C. variolosus and C. sepuclaris as species present on Flores). As Cacomantis species, like other cuckoos, are brood parasites that do not build nests, however, Nage claims about the nest-building habits of witu tui obviously do not match this possible ornithological identification.

236

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 237

WATERHEN White-breasted waterhen • Amaurornis phoenicurus • KUKU RAKU The waterhen is a rail, a water bird with long spindly legs and large feet that produces a series of noisy vocalizations (see figure 27). Metaphorically, Nage employ the bird’s name, kuku raku, in two quite different ways, and I therefore treat these as two separate metaphors. Perhaps owing to its onomatopoeic quality, the name is regularly pronounced with the /r/, despite the general absence of this sound in the central Nage dialect. 416. White-breasted waterhen (1) Kuku raku A thin person with long legs; someone who is garrulous or complains loudly about things Although the bird also has very large feet, in addition to its cries it is the bird’s legs that have metaphorical value for Nage, who characterize people with large or wide feet as having “feet like a fan (or bellows).” An apt metaphor for a garrulous person, the bird’s loud and discordant vocalizations have been described as “a jumble of bubbling, chuckling, squabbling nasal screams and squeals; often uttered by more than one bird at the same time” (Coates and Bishop 1997, 280). As a reference to a thin, long-legged person, the metaphor is generally synonymous with usages employing herons and egrets (Nos. 358, 359). 417. White-breasted waterhen (2) Kuku raku People swarming, crowding around (a desired, object) Relating to human physical and vocal peculiarities, the first metaphorical use of kuku raku (No. 416) straightforwardly reflects distinctive physical features of the bird. While also alluding to the bird’s cries, this second usage is quite different. Several commentators independently analyzed it as follows: people swarming around something are described as waterhens because one of the bird’s distinctive cries sounds like gheo gheo gheo, and gheo is also a word meaning “to encircle” and “to swarm, throng, crowd around, overwhelm.”

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

237

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 238

Figure 27 Waterhen (No. 416)

(The full cry is replicated as gheo gheo gheo kuku raku kuku kuku raku.) As a verbal construct “(to act like) a waterhen” thus describes a number of people busily crowding around a person or place where consumables (food, tobacco) are on offer. This can be done with or without invitation. In the former instance, a person might say, for example, mai kita kuku raku (or bhia kuku raku), “let’s be like waterhens,” thereby encouraging others to share food from

238

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 239

a single plate or take cigarettes from a single packet. (In the second sense I have used the expression myself, when offering cigarettes to Nage associates.) On the other hand, when people take things uninvited or in a grasping manner, they may be admonished for “being like waterhens.” When I first encountered this interpretation, I was naturally sceptical, as it seemed fanciful and idiosyncratic. It is also one of the few metaphors in which an animal’s name can be understood as a verb (as in English “to rat on someone” or “to snake along,” said of a river or road). In fact, the interpretation appears to be widely known among Nage, and the metaphor is regularly employed in this way. However, some commentators suggested the usage – drawing on the homonymy of gheo – was a relatively recent innovation. One man in his late fifties who had spent several years in Java in the 1980s spontaneously stated that, before his departure, he had never heard “waterhen” (kuku raku) used in this way, whereas after his return he began hearing it often. Insofar as the metaphor refers to people taking things in an enthusiastic if not patently voracious or intemperate way, I once suggested that the usage might have been inspired by the similarity between the bird’s onomatopoeic name, kuku raku, and Indonesian kuku rakus, roughly “greedy, grasping fingernails, claws.” But although arguably bolstered by the Nage practice of deleting final consonants (like the /s/ in Indonesian rakus) when incorporating foreign elements into their own language, this hypothesis was not well received. As noted earlier, under the alternative name lako lizu (“sky dog,” No. 110), the cries of the waterhen function as a chronological sign, indicating the beginning of the rainy season (Forth 2004a, 12). However, this significance has no bearing on either of the metaphorical uses of kuku raku.

WHISTLER Bare-throated whistler • Pachycepala nudigula • KETE DHÉNGI 418. Little whistler half-way up the mountain Ana kete dhéngi zéle [or ena] kisa kéli A mistreated child The Bare-throated whistler is a songbird of high altitudes with a melodious and varied vocal repertoire. Occurring in song, this expression and variants

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

239

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 240

draw on a story describing the origin of the whistler, a bird that Nage say is heard but never seen. In the narrative, the bird derives from a little girl who is mistreated by her mother on a cold rainy night and who, to escape her cruel parent, turns into a whistler and flies to the higher slopes of the volcano Ebu Lobo. At least two empirical features of the species inform these ideas. First, the bird is an extraordinary songster and a superb mimic, and its song is indeed heard far more often than the bird itself is seen. Second, the bird inhabits high mountainous regions where, by Nage standards, the air is cold and damp. Consistent with its identification with a mistreated child, the whistler is further associated with aborted foetuses and the souls of deceased infants, which Nage say transform into these birds (Forth 2004a, 87–9, 151). The theme of children or adults being transformed into animals as a result of physical mistreatment is common in Indonesian origin myths, and the story of the whistler has been analyzed in this comparative context in Forth (2007c). Comparative Remarks on the Metaphorical Value of Different Birds and Bird Names As noted earlier, Nage employ forty-nine, or 68 percent, of their bird categories as metaphors. The product is 178 metaphorical expressions, a total second only to mammals. This relative prominence of birds reflects the relative complexity of Nage bird classification and the extent of their knowledge of birds. Most Nage can thus describe and identify dozens of birds by name, with some distinguishing over sixty – a figure that would seem impressive by the standards of anglophone folk ornithology. On the other hand, a comprehensive dictionary of English animal metaphors (Palmatier 1995) records expressions incorporating forty-two bird names, all of which, with the exception of “bird,” correspond to folk-generic categories in anglophone folk taxonomy (e.g., buzzard, chicken, eagle, lark),3 and this number falls not far short of the Nage total. However, some birds in the English list are exotics (e.g., albatross, dodo, parrot, peacock) whereas all Nage birds are local kinds. In addition, several birds Palmatier lists – although not necessarily the metaphors in which they occur – are probably unknown to many Englishspeakers (e.g., booby, catbird, and rook). So there can be little question that, by comparison to most anglophones, Nage possess a greater knowledge of

240

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 241

the birds they employ metaphorically, a circumstance consistent with their apparently greater ability to provide substantial interpretations. Of the twenty-three bird categories that do not occur in any Nage metaphors, two are folk-specifics (kolo dhoro, o ae bha) whose referents are implicitly subsumed by the corresponding folk-generics (see kolo, Nos. 401– 8, and o ae, No. 359) while another ten comprise birds that are unfamiliar to most Nage. But lack of familiarity may not be the only factor, and other reasons for their non-occurrence may lie in the character of the names themselves. Of the forty-nine metaphorical kinds, twenty-three are named monomially (i.e., with single lexemes or “words,” e.g., koka, “friarbird”) while another six designated with binomial names are employed metaphorically only with the short form of the name.4 For example, none of the seven cockatoo metaphors employ the bird’s complete name (kaka kea) but instead either kea or kaka or dialectal forms of these (kéka, kéra). Similarly, the bushchat, completely known as tute péla, occurs in metaphors only under the short form of the name, tute – as do the stubtail (bama or bama cea), oriole (leo or leo te’a), sunbird (tiwe or tiwe te’a), and eagle (kua or kua méze). Other names cannot be shortened without a loss of meaning (e.g., kaka daza, “dollarbird,” cannot be abbreviated as kaka since this always refers to the cockatoo). Including monomial forms of binomials, monomial names account for nearly 60 percent of metaphorical categories, whereas of the twenty-three birds that do not occur in metaphor, just nine (or 39 percent) are designated monomially. In addition, the fourteen binomially named categories include six of the ten unfamiliar birds. Of course, some binomially named birds do occur in metaphors. For example, the Channel-billed cuckoo (muta me) appears in as many as five. Yet such relatively long and complex names, many of which themselves have analyzable meanings (referring to appearance, behaviour, and so on), are evidently less favoured in conventional metaphor, and this likely reflects some combination of syntactical, prosodic, and semantic factors. All named with monomials and all comprising relatively common and distinctive species, the absence of five other kinds from Nage bird metaphors is less easily explained. These include the Sunda pygmy woodpecker (detu, also detu dalu), Great-billed parrot (feni), Savannah nightjar (leba), cuckoo-dove (‘owa), and a rail (wi).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

241

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 242

The Chestnut-backed thrush, papa or ana papa, is also not used metaphorically; however, most central Nage became familiar with the species only in the 1990s, when trappers began catching the birds for commercial sale, and before this time papa (a word also meaning “side” and denoting a reciprocal relationship or action) was mostly unknown as the name of a bird.

242

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 243

6 Other Non-Mammals in Metaphor: Snakes, Lizards, Fish, Frogs, and More Reviewing seventy-three expressions, the present chapter describes all remaining Nage metaphors incorporating vertebrates, thus reptiles, frogs (the only amphibians present on Flores Island), and fish. These include twentythree animal categories, all except three of which are folk-generics. One exception is tu gea, “bullfrog,” a folk-specific included in the generic category “frog” (pake). The other two are the life form categories “snake” (nipa) and “fish” (ika). (As discussed in Forth 2016, three categories of gobies – ana bo, kaka watu, and tebhu teke – as well as fish fry [ipu], all of which Nage employ metaphorically, function in their folk taxonomy as folk-generics.) The categories are dealt with in the same order followed in Forth (2016). Of the seventy-three metaphors, the largest number, twenty-two (30 percent), employ snakes, but lizards come a close second, with nineteen metaphors. Moreover, if the five crocodile metaphors were included with the three named sorts of lizards – a recourse not without herpetological merit – then these would outnumber the snakes. “Snake” (nipa) and “fish” (ika) are the only Nage life forms named with single lexemes (or monomials), a circumstance that facilitates the use of both terms as metaphors. At the same time, the monomial character of the folk-taxonomic names is consistent with the fact that both snakes and fish are physically and behaviourally so similar among themselves, especially in comparison to mammals and birds, and moreover so distinct from other animals. Besides “snake,” Nage metaphors incorporate six more specific snake categories (folk-generics), thus making a total of seven. Palmatier’s (1995) English listings are generally comparable: he records six snake categories (including

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 244

English “snake”), although two of these – “rattlesnake” and “viper” – are according to Palmatier’s interpretations metaphorically synonymous with “snake.” And while Nage employ three lizard categories as metaphors, or four including the crocodile, Palmatier records two (“lizard” and “chameleon”) in addition to “alligator” and “crocodile.” Usages incorporating fish and amphibians in the two languages are less comparable owing to more pronounced zoogeographical differences between eastern Indonesia and English-speaking countries, at least those in the northern hemisphere.

SNAKES 419. Hair that looks like it has been licked by a snake Fu bhia nipa semo Long, straight, and glossy female head hair Considered a mark of beauty, the expression refers especially to the hair of a young woman. Here translated as “to lick,” semo specifically describes the habit of snakes salivating on prey to make it easier to swallow. 420. Snake coiled in a hole Nipa woe lia An inactive, passive, or lazy person As Nage commentators pointed out, snakes coil up in holes in order to sleep and usually uncoil and become active only when they need to go in search of prey. There seems to be little difference between the referent of this metaphor and “snake in an orchard” (No. 422), although serpents inhabiting shady orchards are often encountered coiled and sleeping on vegetation rather than in holes. 421. Snake in a hole, white (or pale) bronzeback Nipa lia, gala bha A person of lower status (including a child) who does not defer to superiors Gala is the snake Dendrelaphis pictus inornatus, the Painted bronzeback. The interpretation of the expression is contested. Mostly employed as a depreca-

244

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 245

tion, the metaphor is by no means always applied to someone who is actually of lower status – as, for example, is a child or adolescent. In a more specific usage, a person can curse another by declaring “you should die like a snake in a hole, a pale bronzeback,” meaning, in part, away from home and without the company of family. As a snake in a hole (in the ground or a rock crevice) is normally more lowly positioned than a snake on the ground or in a tree, however, the image provides a suitable metaphor for a person of low status. So too may “pale bronzeback” insofar as it is the underside of a gala snake that is lighter-coloured, as is the underside of other snakes; hence the focus of this particular phrase may alternatively fall on the belly of the snake contrasting to its darker ventral surface rather than on the relative position of holes typically occupied by snakes. In several respects, the Nage usage recalls the English metaphor “lower than a snake’s belly,” referring to a person who is judged “totally contemptible” or “totally humiliated” (Palmatier 1995, 246). Nage often construe the expression as synonymous with “a red monkey, white gala snake” (No. 235), another phrase usually uttered in anger and directed towards children. Especially with regard to “snake in a hole,” alternative interpretations included a person who lives alone outside of a village (e.g., in a field hut, cf. No. 487) and someone who is bold and aggressive only within his or her home village and never outside. Both behaviours are disapproved by Nage, so in this respect the expression conveys a similar insult. Although most Nage understand “snake in a hole” (nipa lia) as the correct version of the expression, two regular informants insisted this was nipa ‘ia, “snake under an upright stone.” Nevertheless, neither could explain the sense of this phrase. ‘Ia denotes ritually significant stones erected inside villages, but I have never heard of any particular association of such stones with snakes. 422. Snake in an orchard Nipa napu A quiet, inactive, or lethargic person or someone who rarely leaves home The usage seems not to be well known in central Nage. Denoting specific locations planted with fruit-bearing and other useful trees, napu (“orchard,” “grove,” “plantation”) are shady places full of insects and other food for snakes, where, requiring little effort to obtain food, the creatures can remain

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

245

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 246

for long periods, coiled and largely motionless. Rather like English “lounge lizard,” to which it arguably bears some semantic resemblance, nipa napu (“orchard snake”) is not a folk-taxonomic name for any particular kind of snake and occurs only as a metaphor. 423. Snake obstructing a path Nipa baga zala A person who gets in the way Sometimes simply expressed as “like a snake” (bhia ko’o nipa), the phrase can refer, for example, to children who fall asleep or nap on the front gallery of a house, thus obstructing adults engaged in some activity there and needing to step over them. But it can apply to anyone who physically gets in the way of others. In ritual address to spirits, Nage use fata baga zala, “dead wood lying across a path,” to refer to problems or difficulties that hinder people in life’s general course or in the context of particular activities people wish to see to a successful conclusion, but “snake obstructing a path” seems not to be employed in this more abstract way. 424. Snake shedding its skin Nipa lo huwa A person whose clothes fall off or become loose The metaphorical referent of “skin” (huwa) in this expression is usually a waistcloth or sarong, a tubular garment that serves as the basic article of clothing for both men and women and can occasionally come loose or fall down when a person gets up from sitting or reclining. The phrase is uttered mostly in friendly banter among men, though women told me they also use it with reference to both males and females, and to both adults and children. 425. Snake that invades a rat’s hole (nest) Nipa ta’a ‘e lia dhéke A more powerful person who usurps someone less powerful The metaphor turns on the fact that both rats or mice (dhéke) and snakes characteristically occupy and nest in holes. Hence, by analogy, the phrase describes someone who successfully takes over a position or land or other

246

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 247

property that rightfully belongs to a person who is metaphorically smaller and weaker. 426. Two-headed snake Nipa ulu pali A duplicitous person whose intentions are unclear and cannot be trusted The term is also the folk-taxonomic name of the Island pipe snake Cylindrophis opisthorhodus, a species whose tail resembles its head and that raises its tail when retreating from a threat, thereby giving the impression of a snake moving backwards. Nage commonly describe the snake as not only possessing two heads but also as being capable of moving – or going “forward” – in two opposite directions so that the creature’s actual direction of travel is ambiguous. Accordingly, a person described as a “two-headed snake” is someone who may say one thing to one person and something completely different to another, especially in order to advance his or her own interests, gain an opportunity, or stir up trouble. The usage will likely recall the English metaphor “speaking with a forked tongue,” which of course alludes to snakes in general. As shown below, however, the English expression is more exactly replicated in Nage metaphors employing the monitor lizard (Nos. 446 and 443). As not all Nage regard the pipe snake as actually possessing two heads, the metaphor is grounded in an idea that some Nage would dispute. Nevertheless, the representation is rehearsed sufficiently often to maintain the metaphor, which of course derives further support from the animal’s name. (In Malay, another species of Cylindrophis is identically named ular kepala dua, “two-headed snake.”) 427. Ascending snakes Nipa nai A kind of shrub or flowering plant The plant is apparently so named because its stem and leaves are described as slippery, like a snake. Reflecting this property, the leaves are boiled to produce a decoction given to women in labour to ensure a quick and easy delivery. However, “ascending snakes” also describes the consequence of burning driftwood inside a house, a prohibited practice claimed to result in snakes, cockroaches, and perhaps other insects entering a dwelling. For the

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

247

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 248

same reason, Nage are averse to burning this plant as well, although “ascending snakes wood” (kaju nipa nai) seems more often to refer to the wood of trees washed up in a flood. For different dialects of Ngadha and Endenese, Verheijen (1990, 34, 54) lists “ascending snakes” as the name of plants in the genera Pouzolzia, Euodia, or Leea. 428. Snake tuber Uwi nipa A kind of wild tuber The tuber is named with reference to its long, thin shape, having the same thickness from top to bottom, or, as this was once expressed, having a long root and a small “head,” and thus resembling a snake. Informants disagreed about whether it was edible. 429. Growing (ascending) snake Nipa tebu The rainbow Nage have no other term for “rainbow.” As tebu refers to growth, especially in plants, it may seem curious that the Nage imagery involves a snake descending to drink at a water source (thus head first), an idea also suggested by a Lio and Endenese term for rainbows, nipa moa, “thirsty snake.” On the other hand, no one claims ever to have seen this, and all Nage I questioned described “growing snake” merely as a “way of speaking” (bholo ‘ana). An association of rainbows and snakes is general in Indonesia and also occurs in other parts of the world, for example, in the Australian Aboriginal figure of the “rainbow serpent.” In Nage and elsewhere, representing the meteorological phenomenon as a serpent is presumably facilitated by a rainbow’s long and thin shape and multicoloured stripes. Paralleling a widespread Indonesian idea specifying rainbows as precursors of illness or affliction in humans or livestock (Bader 1971; Barnes 1973), Nage claim that a rainbow can suck the blood of people of high rank (Forth 1998, 95), and they warn children against pointing at rainbows lest their fingers become bent. Nipa tebu (“growing snake”) also appears in the longer phrase nipa tebu uza leza, (where uza leza means “sunshine rain”), referring to the fact that rainbows are commonly seen when the sun shines through falling rain or drizzle.

248

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 249

430. Character of a Russell’s viper Waka ba A bold, aggressive person who inspires fear in others Ba is the name of Russell’s viper Daboia russelii limitis, a highly venomous snake that Nage speak of with fear and loathing. As they remark, encountering the viper immediately causes the body hair to stand on end, even in people subsequently able to muster the courage to kill the snake. People’s reaction to someone with “the character of a viper,” typically a man, is similarly visceral. Usually translated with Indonesian wibawa, “power, authority; bearing” and pengaruh, “influence (on others),” waka has two apparently related senses. First, it refers to the human forehead, or more specifically the middle of the forehead just below the hairline. Second, and as in the present expression, the term denotes a personal inner strength, a sort of force of character or masterfulness manifest in interpersonal dealings, which some people possess and others do not – or do so in a lower degree (see the similar sounding waka bha, “white, light-coloured waka,” the quality of a quiet, easily intimidated person who is unable, for example, to respond when spoken to in a harsh manner). As waka denotes a quality normally attributed only to humans, its application to a snake is itself metaphorical, and the metaphor draws primarily on a similarity between the typical human reaction to the snake and an unmediated experience of certain aggressive, powerful individuals. 431. False viper Lola ba The mock viper This is the folk taxonomic name of the Common mock viper Psammodynastes pulverulentus, not an actual viper but a harmless snake Nage recognize as resembling the deadly Russell’s viper (ba). Apart from similar colouring, the snake adopts a viper-like pose when threatened. The precise meaning of lola is uncertain, but the gloss “false” fits Nage explanations of the name, which obviously has the same motivation as English “mock viper.”

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

249

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 250

432. Viper gourd Hea ba A variety of gourd or pumpkin The gourd is so named because the skin has markings like the Russell’s viper. 433. Viper tree, viper wood Kaju ba A kind of tree Used for timber, in context the tree is also called simply ba (see ba dheo, a reference to buildings made of ba and dheo wood). The species is so named because the bark of the tree and the grain of the wood resemble patterning on the skin of the Russell’s viper (see Figure 28). Given the Nage abhorrence of this snake, it is somewhat remarkable that the wood is used in house construction, especially in view of the taboo on driftwood (see No. 427). 434. Bronzeback Gala A person or animal that moves swiftly or does something quickly A long, thin, non-venomous and fairly common snake, Painted bronzebacks are the fastest snakes known to Nage, and suddenly coming across one moving rapidly in the forest or across a path can be very startling. Nage say the snake can move with such speed and force that it can puncture dry vegetation such as bamboo sheaths, and for this reason, and because of the shock it can cause, travellers refer to the snake, euphemistically, as the “spirits’ blowgun” (supi nitu, Forth 2016, 202). The only other snakes to which Nage apply euphemisms are poisonous kinds. Qualities metaphorically represented by the gala snake can be positive or negative. Apart from the several more specific usages listed below, I recorded “like a bronzeback” (bhia gala), describing a person who acts with speed or quickly completes a task; “having a bronzeback’s body” (weki gala), describing human agility as well as speed; and “horse like a bronzeback” (ja sama gala) referring to a swift horse (ja). As regards the last expression, a magical use of the desiccated tail of a bronzeback in horse-racing magic is noteworthy (Forth 2016, 202).

250

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 251

Figure 28 Viper tree (No. 433)

435. Bronzeback’s tongue Lema gala A person who talks too much; a skilled speaker; a persuasive person, a fast or smooth talker The metaphor has nothing to do with forked tongues (as in the English idiom), which of course are characteristic of all snakes. Commentators offered several reasons the bronzeback in particular serves as the vehicle in this expression, including the idea that bronzeback tongues are (proportionally) longer than those of other snakes and dart in and out of the mouth more rapidly and more continually. Perhaps also relevant is the bronzeback’s reported use of its tongue to catch insect prey, especially if this common snake is observed to do so more regularly than other kinds of snakes. 436. Bronzeback whose tail alone remains Gala geze bholo ta’a éko (or ko’o éko) A person who is quick off the mark or in a great hurry

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

251

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 252

The phrase can be abbreviated as gala bholo éko (“bronzeback [with] only the tail [not moving]”), but the notion of “remaining (in place)” expressed by geze (“not yet, temporarily”) is implicit in both versions. As the fastest of snakes, Nage describe bronzebacks as moving so rapidly that, when awakened from sleep, their head and body will already be in motion while the tail remains coiled. How far this might be a deliberate exaggeration is unclear, but the apparent speed of the snakes, as I myself have witnessed, is certainly well founded, and the metaphor is in any case appropriate for a person who is faster than others to move into action. In a particularly cynical application, the phrase can refer to someone, especially a person not fond of work, who is always first to respond to a call to eat. In a more general vein, it can apply to anyone who is in too much of a hurry or who acts too hastily. 437. White (pale) bronzeback, Gala bha. See Snake in a hole (No. 421), Red monkey (No. 235) 438. Of the python tribe ‘Ili ko’o goka A greedy, voracious person Nage are familiar with two species of pythons (goka), Python reticulatus and P. timoriensis, which they distinguish as goka denu and goka leo. In this metaphor, the only one involving pythons, there is no indication that the vehicle is either kind in particular. “Clan” (woe or ‘ili woe) might be a more accurate translation of ‘ili, but “tribe” better expresses the sense in English. The metaphor turns on the fact that pythons swallow their food whole, consuming everything and leaving nothing behind. The metaphor may especially apply to avaricious people who covet other people’s possessions or who take the lion’s share of something, leaving little or nothing for others. Of course, other snakes also swallow food whole, but pythons are by far the largest of snakes and are known to Nage as swallowing relatively large animals, including young pigs. 439. Pit viper waiting for the stick, pit viper (should) expect to be struck Hiku napa bhole

252

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 253

A person who behaves recklessly in dealings with powerful people and so puts him- or herself in danger Hiku refers to the Island pit viper Cryptelytrops insularis (formerly Trimesurus albolabris), and the metaphor refers to someone who, in the common English idiom, is “asking for trouble.” As Nage explained, anyone encountering a pit viper, a venomous but usually unaggressive snake, should immediately grab a stick and strike it dead. In fact, Nage habitually kill all snakes, whether poisonous or not. But for obvious reasons they are especially assiduous when it comes to this very common species, so a pit viper should flee at the approach of a human, and especially one holding a stick. Napa, “to wait,” expresses a future state (see, e.g., napa poa, “in the morning, tomorrow morning”; and napa sa éno, “in a little while,” “presently”) and in the present expression suggests inevitability. Bhole can be translated either as “stick” or “to be struck, get the stick.” More elaborate variants recorded include ma’e kau bhia hiku napa bhole, “do not be like a viper waiting to be struck,” “do not put yourself in danger”; and imu bhia hiku napa bhole, “he is like a viper awaiting the stick,” “he is asking for trouble.” In Sikkanese (eastern Flores) apparently the same metaphor is translated as “pit viper that does not flee when about to be struck” (mea turung ‘oba; Pareira and Lewis 1998, 132). The metaphor is also known in the Keo region, immediately to the south of Nage (Tule 1998). 440. Rat Snake with red cheeks Sawa pipi to A person with a harsh manner or aggressive temperament to whom others acquiesce or follow out of fear Although applied to pythons in other Indonesian languages, sawa in Nage denotes the Indonesian rat snake Elaphe subradiata, a creature that, as its English name suggests, feeds mostly on rats and mice and is therefore frequently encountered inside houses and settlements. After first recording the phrase in the early 1990s, I long suspected it could be applied metaphorically to humans, but the only interpretation I ever obtained was that the expression described an especially aggressive snake that, moreover, did not actually have red cheeks. More recently, however, I recorded applications in the sense given

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

253

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 254

above, one by a man who assured me he had heard it used in the same way by his parents and grandparents (now all deceased). That the creature’s “red cheeks” are themselves metaphorical reveals a verbal identification of the colour red with anger that is found in various languages, including English (Kövecses 2010, 222).

LIZARDS Like many other languages, Nage has no general term for “lizard.” Nage distinguish five lizards by name: monitors (ghoa), skinks (mapa bonga), Tokay geckoes (teke), House lizards (or House geckoes, ana gu), and Flying lizards (kaka hika). Of these, two kinds – the House lizard and Flying lizard (Draco volans) – are not employed as metaphors, although both figure in other symbolic usages (Forth 2013). While the monitor lizard comes a close second, the species Nage most often employ as a metaphor is the Tokay gecko, a circumstance attributable to this relatively large lizard’s common occurrence inside buildings and its loud and distinctive call, a vocalization that has produced the onomatopoeic Nage name teke as well as Malay tokay and indeed English “gecko.” 441. Monitor lizard collecting black ants Ghoa dhaga mule A lazy person who expects to be fed by others The Water monitor Varanus salvator is by far the largest of the five kinds of lizards Nage distinguish by name. Although Tokay geckoes are occasionally consumed, the monitor is also the lizard most often hunted and eaten. Sometimes expressed as “having a mouth like a monitor lizard collecting ants” (wunu mumu bhia ghoa dhaga mule), the present metaphor turns on the behaviour of monitor lizards, which Nage describe as resting with their mouths open waiting for ants to enter. Dhaga means “to collect, accumulate,” as for example when youths go from house to house collecting rice for use in community-wide rituals. Like other monitor metaphors, the present expression implies a deceitful character since Nage describe ants that enter the lizard’s mouth as being fooled, thinking it is dead or sleeping. Mule refers specifically

254

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 255

to a kind of black ant, but it is unclear why this term should be used rather than metu, a more inclusive term for ants. 442. Monitor lizard tricks ants Ghoa ‘ole mule A person who ensnares other people As Nage commentary revealed, the imagery here, based on observation of monitor behaviour, is the same as that reflected in the previous metaphor (No. 441), although the local interpretation is different. 443. Monitor lizard that fools black ants with its bifurcate tongue Ghoa wole mule lema sanga dhua A person who misleads others with dishonest talk The expression combines two separate metaphors, “a monitor’s tongue” and “a monitor collecting ants” (Nos. 446 and 441). Wole, “to fool, trick,” is a variant of ‘ole. The metaphor is evidently motivated in part by the fact that the monitor deceives ants with its tongue, the same body part used by the human referent to deceive other people. 444. Monitor lizard’s footprints Pala ghoa Someone who misleads, sets a false trail Like virtually all monitor metaphors, this refers to a dishonest or deceitful person. More specific versions include: “do not be like a monitor’s tracks” (ma’e bhia pala ghoa) and “do not follow (believe) people who are like a monitor’s limbs” (ma’e dhéko bhia lima ghoa). Nage describe monitors’ feet as “turned the wrong way” (bhale sala) or “towards the back” (pago logo) so that their tracks can fool hunters. Although Nage sometimes speak as though monitors have fully inverted feet, this should be understood as a hyperbole, and a morphological basis for the idea can found in the way the lizard’s back feet, especially, often appear to point outwards from the body or even backwards. In addition, when Water monitors move, they place the “tarsal part of the foot on the ground first … [twisting] it as the body moves forward

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

255

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 256

and then [stamping] the toes on the ground, resulting in a (kind of) inverted footprint” (C. Ciofi pers. comm., cited in Forth 2013). Despite its apparently fantastic ring, therefore, both the notion that monitors have inverted feet and the derived metaphor have an obvious basis in empirical observation. 445. Monitor lizard’s penis Lasu ghoa A man who engages in indiscriminate sex Like male snakes, male monitor lizards possess hemipenes, bifurcate intromittent organs that allow them to mount females from either the left or right. The metaphor refers more specifically to a man who has intercourse both with women who are permitted as sexual (and marital) partners and women who are not. 446. Monitor lizard’s tongue Lema ghoa A person who says one thing on one occasion and something different on another, or someone who speaks dishonestly Unlike other lizards, monitor tongues are forked, like those of snakes. The metaphor is therefore comparable to “two-headed snake” (No. 426) and even more similar to English “speaking with a forked tongue.” A dishonest person can be more explicitly described as “having a tongue is like a monitor’s tongue” (lema kau bhia ko’o lema ghoa). 447. Skin like a monitor lizard Hu’i weki bhia ko’o ghoa A person (usually a man) with hard and rough skin An alternative expression is “back like a monitor” (logo bhia ghoa). Motivated simply by the quality of the lizard’s skin, the expression applies to shirtless men who labour in the sun as well as to people with a skin condition or people who do not bathe or have not bathed and whose skin is caked in dirt – thus replicating the mottled skin of the monitor. Hu’i weki translates literally as “skin of the body.”

256

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 257

448. Child of a skink Ana mapa bonga (or ana ko’o mapa bonga) A person whose paternity is unknown or who will not reveal his or her paternity Skinks are lizards composing the large and diverse herpetological family Scincidae, and comprise small to medium-sized lizards often encountered in or near Nage settlements. Calling someone “child of a skink” is based on a belief, found among Nage as among other eastern Indonesians, according to which skinks are able to impregnate female domestic pigs (Forth 2016, 298– 300). Piglets thus fathered are recognized by striping on the pelage similar to that found on the Many-lined skink Mabuya multifasciata, the most common referent of mapa bonga (ana is “child”), and moreover on infant wild pigs, ana wawi witu – a metaphor (No. 120) that, significantly, has much the same referent as “child of a skink.” 449. Skink pleads for help Mapa soba loa A person who claims great need and continually requests assistance from others The expression is mostly used for a person who persistently asks for something, thus becoming troublesome and annoying. Although some were uncertain of the referent, in the view of most Nage mapa is to be understood as a short form of the name mapa bonga, “skink.” It is also relevant that a minority regard mapa and bonga as names for two separate though similar kinds of lizards, while in some parts of the Keo region, mapa alone is the name for all skinks. The term loa means “to spill over, overflow, go beyond the bounds.” Soba can mean “to plead, earnestly request,” “claim to be in need,” “admit defeat,” or “to sigh, moan” (cf. soba mata, “to know that one will die,” “to bemoan one’s impending death”) and may be cognate with Ngadha and Lio soba, “to try, test” (Arndt 1961; Arndt 1933; cf. Indonesian coba, in the same senses). Only one commentator offered an interpretation of how the metaphor reflected the behaviour of skinks, claiming that in the Geo region, from where his wife derives, loa is hoa, a term referring to dry fallen leaves, and

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

257

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 258

that, accordingly, soba hoa (and thus soba loa) means “to get help from leaves.” He then explained that the phrase refers to skinks foraging on the ground after sunrise and every now and again ducking under large fallen leaves to protect themselves from predators. However, the informant also asserted that the usage referred not so much to someone who is in need as to a person who keeps stopping work in order to take a rest, talk to people, and so on. While this may sound rather unlikely, it should be noted that the man provided exactly the same exegesis when I questioned him again two years after our first conversation. 450. Skink’s mouth Mumu mapa A forest vine In one opinion the plant is so named because the edible fruits of the vine somehow resemble the mouth (mumu) of a skink, but other people I asked were uncertain whether mapa in this context referred to the lizard. For So’a, Verheijen (1990, 33) lists mumu mapa as Cynanchum, a genus of vines. 451. Biting like a Tokay gecko Kiki bhia teke (or Bhia kiki teke) A person who bites another in a fight; someone who holds onto something and will not let go Nage know geckoes for their powerful bite and ability to grip firmly with their strong teeth and jaws. Fights between spouses as well as fights between men or women can involve biting. Discussing this metaphor, one man mentioned how, when he was young, his mother once bit his father in the thigh and how the limb became so swollen that he was immobilized for a month. In the second sense another commentator suggested that the phrase could be used for a stingy person, a sense also covered by an invertebrate metaphor (No. 501). 452. Eyeballs like gecko’s eggs Ana mata bhia telo teke A person with round, bulging eyes or someone who stares wide-eyed

258

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 259

Tokay gecko’s eggs are white and round and not much smaller than human eyeballs. 453. Gecko at the top of a dalu tree that is difficult to climb Teke tolo dalu gho ghedo pau A person who makes a great effort but is frustrated and unable to advance Nage describe the trunks of dalu trees (Albizia sp.) as slippery and having loose bark, thus making climbing difficult, so the expression depicts a lizard in a tree that is unable either to climb further up or come down. It provides yet another instance of a circle-dance lyric in which singers tease or deride (néke) members of the opposite sex. According to one interpretation, the metaphor refers to a man unsuccessfully climbing a house post in an attempt to enter the dwelling of an unmarried woman, whereas from a male perspective it suggests a woman who is unable to draw the attention of a man. 454. Gecko high in a banyan tree cries in lamentation Teke tolo nunu polu kasi ku A person lamenting, or who bemoans his or her lot, or otherwise speaks in a sorrowful or melancholic voice Also expressed as teke hodo nunu (hodo, tree cavity), the metaphor occurs in songs accompanying circle-dancing. Nage remarked how the phrase, like others in this genre, causes people to remember spouses and kin who have died. Tokay geckoes are commonly found in banyan trees, whose cavities may house numerous geckoes. One commentator noted how these cavities are narrow, restricted places, so that the metaphor could be understood as an allusion to limitations imposed by ill fortune. In the same connection, another man stated that vocalizations of Tokay geckoes occupying banyans differ from such geckoes heard inside houses. Although the gecko’s call, and especially the longer descending note that completes a series of cries, might be experienced as melancholic, no one I questioned seemed to concur in this. The onomatopoeic name of the lizard, teke, also means “circle-dance,” but this is apparently a homonym reflecting a different root and has no definite connection with references to geckoes in circle-dance songs. In regard to the dance, in which performers move in a circle clinging on to one another’s

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

259

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 260

shoulders, the term probably derives from teke in the sense of “to hold (onto), grasp.” Interestingly, geckoes are known for their grasping ability (see No. 455), but the lizard’s name is sufficiently explained by onomatopoeia. 455. Hands (arms) of a Tokay gecko Lima teke A person who is agile, especially an experienced climber or a man skilled at grasping and holding onto things People thus spoken of can be described variously as “having arms like a gecko” or more simply “being like a gecko.” Like other Indonesian languages, Nage does not distinguish hands from arms, both of which they call lima. Denoting the arms and hands of humans, lima is also used for the corresponding parts of lizards. However, the metaphor is more specifically motivated by the adhesive pads on the gecko’s “hands” and feet, which allow the lizards to hold things firmly, climb vertical services with ease, and even walk upside down under tree branches or inside buildings. A special application of the metaphor dating from the colonial period, when the Dutch introduced Western ball games, is to someone skilled in catching and holding onto things thrown or kicked, such as a soccer ball. Accordingly, there is a notion that a person who wants to become a proficient goal-keeper should eat geckoes’ forelimbs, and Nage say of someone skilled in goal-keeping “you have eaten gecko arms” (kau pesa lima teke). But whether or how often this is actually done as a form of homeopathic magic is unclear. (By contrast, Nage do eat gecko flesh as a cure for respiratory ailments.) Where lima teke refers specifically to someone skilled in climbing trees, it is synonymous with “legs and arms of a monkey” (No. 216). 456. Male gecko Teke lalu A man whose wife is larger than him The metaphor is applied mainly in jest to husbands whose wives are fat or otherwise large-bodied. The usage was known only to two brothers who claimed to know about the relative size of male and female geckoes from observing mating pairs. The idea that male geckoes, like the males of some other

260

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 261

reptiles, are larger than the females appears quite widespread in central Flores (somewhat contrary to an earlier report, Forth 2013). The notion is not clearly grounded in herpetological fact. However, since the two brothers mentioned it independently of one another, there is no reason to suspect fabrication. In addition, a man from a closely neighbouring village also knew the expression, although he was unfamiliar with this interpretation. Even so, it seems to be a relatively “private metaphor” that, like a private joke, is current only within a small circle of people. 457. Tokay gecko’s teeth Ngi’i teke A person who is strong and resolute or tenacious; the nicked blade of a knife The metaphor derives from the firm bite of the Tokay gecko. Nage thus remark how snakes should be wary when attacking a gecko as the lizard can bite its attacker in the throat and not let go, thereby disabling and eventually killing the snake. They also say that when a Tokay gecko bites a person, the lizard must be killed in order to release its grip, and that when catching a gecko, one must grasp it by the back of the neck to avoid being bitten. According to an idea evidently less grounded in empirical observation, a gecko will let go only if it hears a thunder clap. In the same vein, rows of serrations called “gecko’s teeth,” customarily carved on sacrificial posts (peo) and decorated house posts, are described as symbols of strength, tenacity, and endurance. And similarly suggesting human tenacity is the expression “like the teeth of a gecko (that) never lets go” (bhia ngi’i teke ea talo). Alluding to the same resemblance with the saw-like teeth of geckoes, “a blade like gecko’s teeth” is one with a series of nicks that is much in need of sharpening. 458. Gecko goby Tebhu teke A kind of freshwater fish with a large head like that of a Tokay gecko This is another instance of a folk-taxonomic name incorporating the name of a quite different animal. Tebhu (or ana tebhu) denotes another kind of goby (Forth 2016, 212–13).

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

261

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 262

459. Gecko’s back Logo teke A growth stage of maize This applies when maize is nearly ripe and leaves enclosing the cobs are marked like the skin on a gecko’s back.

FISH 460. Fish in the boat Ika wawo kowa Something that is already accomplished or is already certain, a sure thing As Nage never fish from vessels, their territory containing no rivers or other bodies of water large enough to require or facilitate these, the present metaphor has evidently been adopted from some coastal region. Fish in the boat are of course fish that have already been caught, so the expression is comparable to English “bird in the hand” and “in the bag” – a phrase originally alluding to small game a hunter has killed and placed in a bag. Wawo kowa literally means “on top of the boat” but refers to the inside of a boat, conceived in relation to the water below. 461. Fish in water Ika one ae A person who moves about aimlessly or in an unpredictable manner The source of this metaphor is fish swimming hither and yon, moving in one direction for a short while before quickly changing course. In one instance, it was applied to groups of young men described disapprovingly as avoiding work and wandering about aimlessly. 462. Fish in water resting and pretending to be asleep Ika one ae ézu podi nade A person who appears to be inactive and not paying attention but, contrary to this impression, suddenly responds or takes action

262

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 263

The expression occurs in a song lyric. Although both nade and ézu mean “to sleep, be asleep,” the second term is the more common usage in dialects to the east and northeast of central Nage, and also in central Keo. Applied for example to a person who seems not to be listening to a discussion but then unexpectedly begins to participate, the metaphor turns on the image of a fish, motionless and seemingly asleep, that suddenly swims off. 463. Dolphin down by the coast Lobhu lau ma’u A person who is always disappearing and reappearing; an impotent man unable to maintain an erection Although dolphins are marine mammals, Nage loosely classify them as “fish” (ika). Less often rendered as “dolphin down in the sea” (lobhu lau mesi), or simply as “like a dolphin” (bhia ko’o lobhu), the metaphor reflects the animal’s habit of bounding out of the water and immediately submerging, only to emerge again. A common modern application, both in Nage and the Keo region (where I also recorded the metaphor), is to truant children who attend school irregularly. In reference to male impotence, “down by the coast” can partly be understood as an allusion to the lower part of the body and the genital region and, more specifically still, to the penis, which, like a dolphin, may rise up but in an impotent man quickly descends. Many central Nage are familiar with lobhu only as the name of a sea creature of a kind unknown. In fact, they are more familiar with dolphin flesh, occasionally sold in highland markets and said to taste like buffalo or deer. Evidently, then, the metaphor, although nowadays in wide use among Nage, ultimately derives from a coastal region. 464. Wanting (only) shark’s liver Mo’o ate iu (or hai wai ate iu) A person who is given something but demands something better Although very few Nage have tasted shark’s liver, some know its reputation as an extremely rich and tasty dish, an assessment shared by eastern Indonesian coastal peoples. From this derives the further expression “sweet (tasty, delicious) like a shark’s liver” (mi bhia ate iu) and, in regard to its richness, a

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

263

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 264

claim that a single small piece is a sufficient complement for a large plate of rice. One application of the metaphor is in describing or rebuking children who continually ask for things but are never satisfied with what they receive. Given the rarity of shark’s liver in central Nage, the phrase also implies an object that is extravagant and difficult to obtain. At the same time, sharks’ livers are not likely to be a food regularly consumed anywhere on Flores Island, so assuming that the metaphor derives from a coastal region, this implication would also be entailed in the metaphor as employed elsewhere. Shark’s liver plays a central role in an eastern Sumbanese version of a myth, widely known in eastern Indonesia, relating the origin of the dugong (Dugong dugon). In the Sumbanese tale, a man catches a shark and wants to reserve the liver for himself, but while he is absent, his wife cooks the liver and gives it to her hungry children. On returning home and discovering what has happened, the husband savagely beats the wife, who in order to bathe her wounds, enters the sea, and after remaining partly submerged for a time, gradually transforms into the sea mammal (Forth 1988). This version of the myth, however, seems to be unknown on Flores. 465. Goby in shallow water Ana bo ae ‘ete A person who is out of breath Since in most contexts Nage contrast gobies with “fish” (ika), the relationship between these freshwater fish and the more general category is rather complex (Forth 2016, 211–16), and I list this and the following two metaphors under “fish” simply as a matter of convenience. The commonest referent of the present expression is someone who tries to speak when exhausted and gasping for breath, so that his or her speech is faltering and unclear. It can also refer to people who open and close their mouths in response to food that is too hot or too spicy. Ana bo is another name for ana tebhu (Sicyopterus sp.), a freshwater goby. The metaphor draws on the image of weir fishing where, after fish and other creatures have entered, the weir is drained, thus leaving fish gasping for air and rapidly opening and closing their mouths. ‘Ete is “to drain,” “drained, dried up.”

264

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 265

466. Loach goby Kaka watu A small child who clings to his or her mother Consistent with the name kaka watu, meaning “sticks to rocks,” the Loach goby (Rhyacichthys aspro) is a fish with a flattened head and ventral mouth that attaches itself to stones at the bottom of rivers and streams using its broadened pelvic and pectoral fins as well as its head and snout (Larson 2011, 55). The behaviour thus provides an appropriate metaphor for a child who is too “clinging,” which is to say, too much attached to his or her mother. An apparent botanical equivalent is “fungus on dead wood” (ki’i tolo fata), although this can additionally refer to anyone who stays long in a single place. 467. Catching various things and coming across a Loach goby ‘A’i ‘a’i jeka ko’o kaka watu Someone who in the course of an activity encounters something positive and unexpected or requiring exceptional luck to obtain Nowadays, “luck” is usually expressed with the Indonesian term rejeki, “luck, good fortune,” rendered by Nage as reja ki. Nage say Loach gobies usually occur only in larger rivers and are extremely rare in smaller rivers or streams. The source of the metaphor is thus people fishing in small streams expecting to catch crustaceans, eels, or other gobies but, in addition or instead, catch a Loach goby. The idea that these gobies occur far less often in smaller streams than in larger rivers appears inconsistent with ichthyological evidence, according to which they live in very swift rocky streams (Larson 2011, 55). However, Larson also describes the fish as very difficult to catch, and it may be this, rather than their rarity in small streams, that accounts for the notion that catching one requires exceptionally good fortune. 468. Head like a gecko goby Ulu bhia ko’o tebhu teke A person with a disproportionately large head The goby’s large head resembles the head of a Tokay gecko. The metaphor thus compares a large-headed person to a large-headed fish (see No. 458), although it can also be used as a gratuitous or “friendly” insult.

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

265

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 266

469. Dense as fish fry in the estuary, Kapa bhia ipu lau nanga. See Numerous as black ants in the hills (No. 510) 470. Fish fry at one end of a pool sees many people and pretends to be crazy Ipu lau éko tiwu tei tei riwu imu rona podi bingu A person who sees members of the opposite sex and starts acting peculiarly in order to attract their attention Ipu denotes the fry of various freshwater fish that enter estuaries and ascend rivers in certain months of the year, when they are caught in great numbers.1 The expression is a lyric usually sung to accompany circle-dancing and, like others of this genre, is used to tease or deride (néke) people of the opposite sex. Commenting on rona, the dialectal form of central Nage ‘ona (“to make” or “cause”), Nage suggested the expression may derive from Réndu or Dhawe, both regions further seaward where ipu are more common. Riwu is similarly more often used than ‘iwu (“mass, many people”), thus once again illustrating a special occurrence of the /r/ that is not heard in everyday speech. Bingu can be understood as either “crazy, deranged” or “confused.” Ola can be inserted between rona and podi, thus producing rona ola podi bingu, which would translate as “to make an act of pretended craziness or derangement.” In any event, the expression conveys the sense of someone making a spectacle of him- or herself in order to gain attention. Why fish fry are employed in the metaphor no one could explain, but it could conceivably relate to the bustle caused by the appearance of fry in rivers and large numbers of people converging to harvest the swarming fish. 471. Fish fry have their pools, monkeys have their gathering places Ipu ne’e tiwu, ‘o’a ne’e loka People belonging to different communities have different customs Loka can refer to anywhere that monkeys gather but also to a gathering of monkeys, or a troop. Applied to humans, it denotes a location set aside for a particular activity or performance (e.g., loka to’a lako or loka mao, a hunting shrine; loka etu, a demarcated field where pugilistic competitions are held; loka tua, a palm gin distillery). Employed as a proverb, the parallelistic expression is comparable to Indonesian lain kolam, lain ikan, “different pools,

266

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 267

different fish,” and lain padang, lain belalang, “different fields, different grasshoppers.” It also recalls the American English “different strokes for different folks.” A prosodic influence is evident in the assonance of ipu (fry) and tiwu (pool) and ‘o’a (monkey) and loka (place).

EELS Nage do not classify eels as fish (ika). The two eel metaphors I recorded both focus on the slipperiness of eels. 472. Eel without slime Tuna ta’a una mona Someone without possibilities or whose situation is difficult, dire, or desperate Nage una is curious. While also designating rough, scaly, or blistered human skin (see logo una, “blistered back”), the term is related to words in other Malayo-Polynesian languages meaning “(fish) scale” (Blust and Trussel 2010), but the Nage term refers to slime, or specifically a layer of slime on an eel’s skin. As Nage recognize, unlike fish, eels do not have scales, and fish scales are in any case called by an unrelated word, dila. An eel’s slime, as commentators pointed out, is its primary means of protection, making it difficult for humans or other animals to catch and hold onto the creatures. Thus just as an eel without slime would be largely defenceless, so a person in a comparable state would be similarly powerless and vulnerable. Apart from people otherwise lacking in possibilities, Nage interpreted the metaphor as also referring to someone who strives but without result and so remains poor or otherwise deficient, and is therefore disregarded by others. 473. Slippery as an eel Ngélu bhia tuna A devious or treacherous person Nage ngélu, “slippery,” is metaphorically identical to the English word, as is the entire metaphor to English “slippery as an eel.” Indonesian licin similarly covers both meanings, being glossed by Echols and Shadily (1989) both as

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

267

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 268

“slippery, slick” and as “smooth, smooth-tongued; cunning, crafty.” If not slippery eels, then the use of “slipperiness” to describe an abstract human quality likely has a very widespread occurrence cross-culturally.

FROGS Frog metaphors incorporate two named categories: tu gea, denoting the Brown bullfrog Kaloula baleata, and pake, a more general term for frogs. Nage regard tadpoles (ana fe) not as immature frogs but as essentially different creatures that nevertheless transform into frogs. As a component of their name, therefore, ana does not mean “child(ren)” nor does unanalyzable fe mean “frog,” and I include the single Nage tadpole metaphor in the present section not for reasons of folk taxonomy but merely for convenience. 474. Belly of a bullfrog Tuka tu gea A person with a bloated or distended abdomen The body of the Brown bullfrog (tu gea) inflates considerably when it vocalizes, a feature Nage regularly mention when distinguishing this frog from others. 475. Bullfrog holding its breath Tu neke ngai A person with a large belly; someone who has difficulty breathing; a person who makes him- or herself appear more powerful than he or she actually is in order to impress others or threaten adversaries More recent evidence dispels previously registered doubt (Forth 2016, 221) that tu, a lexeme with several meanings, refers in this context to the Brown bullfrog, more completely known as tu gea. In all senses, the metaphor is motivated by the bullfrog’s habit of inflating its body. In the first sense, referents include a woman in late pregnancy and someone severely constipated. In the second, the phrase refers to a person suffering from lung disease and who, somewhat like an inflated frog, holds his or her breath or is unable fully to exhale. Also relevant here is the Nage idea that consuming the flesh of the Brown

268

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 269

bullfrog can relieve lung disorders (nowadays usually referred to as “asthma”) and a children’s pastime that involves holding a bullfrog and reciting tu tu neke ngai, tu tu neke ngai as the frog’s belly expands further and further. The third and more abstract sense of the metaphor recalls the semantically similar English idioms “to puff oneself up,” “to puff up one’s chest,” and “puffed-up.” Nage describe the Brown bullfrog as inflating its body not only while vocalizing but, more deliberately, to scare off enemies. 476. Eyeballs like a squeezed frog Ana mata bhia pake kese A person with round, bulging eyes The usage is synonymous with “eyes like gecko’s eggs” (No. 452). 477. Frog inside a bamboo tube Pake one tobho A statement for which evidence is lacking, or whose source and therefore value is indeterminate The metaphor turns on the image of a vocalizing frog hidden inside a container: its call (the “statement”) can be heard but the creature cannot be seen, nor perhaps can one know from where exactly the sound is coming. Reflecting a general value Nage place on the visual sense as a source of accurate knowledge (Forth 2016), commentators compared the metaphor to Indonesian kabar angin (literally, “wind news,” “news brought by the wind”), referring to a rumour or unsubstantiated report. In terms of imagery, however, the expression bears a greater similarity to Indonesian “frog under a half coconut shell” (katak dalam tempurung), although this has a different meaning – namely, people whose knowledge is limited because their vision or experience is restricted. The Indonesian metaphor also occurs in a Sikkanese expression, ganu bla’ur deri é’i korak (Pareira and Lewis n.d., 92, s.v. katak), but no interpretation is provided for this. 478. Frog that has taken a great leap Pake bago méze A person who, after attaining a high position, no longer considers the interests of relatives and associates

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

269

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 270

Commentators remarked how a person who has thus risen not only will no longer help his fellows but may even exploit them – or “eat their eggs (spawn)” as this was once expressed. One man gave as an example people who have attained modern political office or high-ranking positions in the civil service. However, no other evidence suggests the metaphor is modern or could not apply in traditional contexts. The Nage expression largely parallels English “to leapfrog (over someone or something),” meaning “to move ahead of someone” and often used for a person who is promoted over someone of higher rank (Palmatier 1995, 230). Previously (Forth 2016) I showed how pake bago (“leaping frog”) can be interpreted as a named taxon (specifically a folk-varietal) comprising an unidentified kind of large frog. However, in the present metaphor it seems to refer to any sort of frog (pake). 479. Frog of two rivers Pake lowo dhua A person with divided loyalties, a person who maintains residence in two different places The two interpretations are closely related since, among Nage, being resident in two different places (villages) generally involves being simultaneously obligated to two different groups. The metaphor always implies a negative evaluation and is comparable to English “running with the fox and hunting with the hounds.” More specific interpretations offered by commentators included simultaneously claiming membership of two different clans – a phenomenon actually quite common in central Nage but openly disapproved by many people – and being married to two women (bhia ta’a fai dhua dhua, “to be like a man with two wives”), a situation that, since co-wives were usually housed in separate dwellings, formerly would usually require a man to divide his time between two different houses and villages. (“Like a man with two wives,” it should be noted, is itself a metaphor insofar as it is used in a more general reference to divided loyalties.) Since mass conversion to Catholicism, polygyny has become disapproved by Nage, although it still occasionally occurs. Other interpretations suggested the metaphor could apply to a procrastinator or a person unable to make a choice between two alternatives, but I am unsure how often it is used in this sense.

270

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 271

480. Frogs calling Pake polu A number of people all talking at once, a noisy gathering The basis of the metaphor is the fact that frog vocalizations are mostly noticed when a large number of frogs are calling at the same time. Interestingly, this behaviour suggests the kind of frog named tu gea (the Brown bullfrog) as opposed to other frogs called pake. Pake, however, is also employed in a broader sense that includes the bullfrogs. 481. Frogs have livers, crayfish have bellies Pake ne’e ate, kuza ne’e tuka Everyone should consider and be well disposed to their fellows This is sometimes rendered the other way around, as “crayfish have bellies, frogs have livers.” Nage speak of the liver (ate) and the belly (tuka) as the sites of thought and feelings, and they sometimes combine these as tuka ate (“belly [and] liver”) when referring to psychological qualities or qualities of character often expressed with ate alone (as in ate méze, literally “big livered”). As among other Indonesian peoples, “liver” for Nage is symbolically equivalent to “heart” among English and other European speakers. A common proverb, the expression is used when admonishing people who act in a thoughtless, unfeeling way by pointing out that “even frogs and crayfish” (éle pake ne’e ate) have thoughts and feelings (specifically for other frogs and crayfish). As crayfish and frogs are small aquatic animals, their selection here appears partly motivated by their representation as lowly creatures, otherwise inferior to humans, but who in their consideration of creatures of the same kind nevertheless compare favourably to an unfeeling or ungenerous human. Attesting to the figurative character of this expression, Nage, as I was able to confirm, do not regard crayfish or frogs as particularly thoughtful or feeling creatures, hence the usage cannot be adduced as evidence of any animistic ontology. In fact, as much as anything the selection of pake (frogs) and kuza (crayfish) reflects prosodic considerations and, particularly, the assonance of the two animal names and ate (“liver,” or metaphorically, “heart”) and tuka (“belly”), respectively.

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

271

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 272

482. Hair like a frog’s fingers (digits) Fu bhia kanga pake Human head hair that is unwashed or uncombed Other than their being long and thin, what might link frog digits in particular with such hair is uncertain. But additional factors could be their shiny or greasy appearance and bulbous tips, which might be compared with knots or tangles in dishevelled or matted head hair. 483. Frog pig Wawi pake A variety of wild pig Recorded just once, the term refers to a kind of pig reputedly able to jump into thick forest vines or tree branches when pursued by hunting dogs. Such pigs are more often called wawi kua (see No. 324) and, in the ‘Ua region, wawi take (Forth 2016, 97). 484. Tadpole with its mouth open feeding on dirt Ana fe ta nganga zaki A shiftless person who eats at others’ expense Nganga means “to open the mouth to receive food,” while zaki more specifically refers to human body dirt. The image conveyed is that of a creature with its mouth regularly open, depending on others for sustenance, hence the phrase serves as an apt metaphor for a sponger or free-loader. As tadpoles breathe through gills like fish, their throats move regularly through pulsing, thus apparently giving the impression of eating. Zaki may be especially appropriate as it can be understood specifically as a reference to dirt that accumulates on the body of someone engaging in physical labour and from whose efforts an idler might derive sustenance.

CROCODILE Crocodiles, more specifically marine crocodiles Crocodylus porosus, no longer occur within territories to which central Nage have regular access, but they

272

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 273

did so until the 1950s, when they would ascend far up the river Ae Sésa (Forth 2016, 221–4). As the following attests, they still survive in several conventional metaphors. 485. Crocodile Ngebu A greedy, rapacious or avaricious person; a man who constantly chases women, a lecher Specific applications of the metaphor combine greed for food or other material things with an excessive sexual appetite, thus reflecting the universal symbolic equation of eating and sexual intercourse. As other metaphors suggest, Nage regard crocodiles as voracious eaters, and in the first sense this metaphor is synonymous with No. 488. 486. Crocodile down by the coast, there is nothing it does not desire Ngebu lau mau, mona apa bau A philanderer who will engage any woman in intercourse While this usage depicts the crocodile as given specifically to sexual excess, it is not clear that Nage regard this as an actual attribute of the creature, and the metaphor more likely owes more to the symbolic equation of food and sex mentioned in regard to No. 485. As discussed with reference to the dolphin metaphor (No. 463), “down by the coast” can have a double meaning, denoting both the environment of saltwater crocodiles and the lower part of the body (where of course the genitalia are located). One variant of a complementary expression is “gogo up on the volcano, there is nothing that will satisfy it (or, that it will refuse)” (gogo zéle lobo mona apa mozo), a reference to a legendary and now extinct group of hominoids represented as gluttons and reputed once to have lived high on the slopes of the Ebu Lobo volcano (Forth 2008). 487. Crocodile of the lower regions Ngebu ngeda People who spend all or most of their time in the fields

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

273

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 274

The expression is largely synonymous with uta tua, “vegetables and palm wine,” meaning basic foodstuffs – a disparaging reference to people who are primarily occupied in subsistence activities and so rarely leave their gardens. From Bo’a Wae and other central Nage villages, ngeda refers to seaward regions where much agricultural land is located, and being the place of larger rivers as well, it was also here that Nage would formerly encounter crocodiles. As the metaphor refers more specifically to people preoccupied with subsistence tasks – or who, as Nage say, “only work or live to eat” – it partly reflects a representation of crocodiles as voracious eaters. Like other metaphors employing crocodiles, the phrase is derogatory since it depicts people who “live in the fields” – either in lone field huts or clusters of such huts, typically distant from villages (bo’a) – as being of low status and as not involving themselves in collective rituals and other affairs of the village. It is also one of several metaphors that reveal a negative evaluation of the seaward direction (lau; see Nos. 36, 87, 103, 164). According to one commentator, ngebu ngeda is a misconstrual of ngibu ngeda, where ngibu means “to hide oneself, stay hidden.” If this is correct, most people at present nevertheless understand the phrase as ngebu ngeda and thus as a reference to the crocodile. Also reflecting a general understanding of the phrase as a reference to crocodiles, another informant provided a more elaborate interpretation, claiming it applied not just to people who live more or less permanently outside of established villages but also to people thus domiciled who steal crops and also livestock – as, in the case of livestock, crocodiles also once did. 488. Of the crocodile tribe ‘Ili ko’o ngebu A greedy person The metaphor is considered synonymous with “of the python tribe” (No. 438) and reflects the same motivation. How accurate the reputation for greed of either crocodiles or pythons may be is debatable. On the one hand, hungry crocodiles will quickly devour the entire carcass of a large animal; on the other, like pythons and other reptiles, they can go without food for considerable lengths of time.

274

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 275

489. Crocodile’s tail Éko ngebu The zig-zag pattern or series of serrations carved along the outer branches of a forked sacrificial post (peo) Whether the motif is intended to represent anything in particular is unclear, and it is quite possible that the sawback pattern is named only for its resemblance to the bony scutes on a crocodile’s back rather than an original intention to render part of the posts in the shape of a crocodile because of some quality that crocodiles represent for Nage (Forth 1994; see also No. 457).

SEA TURTLE Although freshwater turtles appear to have been present in more easterly parts of Flores during the twentieth century (Forth 2017c; Forth 2018d) and may still survive in some places, before the advent of mass media these animals were unknown in central Nage. By contrast, marine turtles have evidently been known for a long time, even though, as sea creatures, they are of course extra-territorial. Nage call turtles kea, the same name applied to cockatoos, although deriving from a different protoform, and to distinguish the marine reptiles they specify them as kea mesi, “sea kea” (Forth 2016, 224–6). 490. Sea turtle that turns its head from side to side while being butchered Kea mézo keti A person who appears perplexed or disoriented, not knowing where to turn for assistance As a highland people with little direct knowledge of killing and butchering turtles, Nage have evidently borrowed this metaphor from coastal populations. The expression alludes to the behaviour of turtles that, after being captured and brought to shore, will move their heads from side to side in an apparent state of bewilderment while their flesh is being cut into strips (keti). As some Nage know, and as I also heard from coastal Lio, a turtle’s head and eyes will still move for some time after the animal is slaughtered, and even after the head is severed. For this reason, Lio wawi kéra, “(sea) turtle pig,”

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

275

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 276

refers to pig meat that “still moves” after the carcass is butchered (Forth fieldnotes 2017). 491. Turtle tuber Kebu kéra A kind of wild tuber Kéra is the term for marine turtles in the Ngadha and Lio languages, and Nage interpreted it here as a reference to turtles. In addition, commentators explained the name as describing the shape of the tuber, which in contrast to other tubers called kebu, which are generally round, are elliptical like the shell of a turtle. Conclusions and Comparisons For a variety reasons that should not need rehearsing, it is highly unlikely people anywhere who are familiar with snakes do not make some symbolic use of them. English metaphors that employ “snake” or “serpent” as a reference to a treacherous, malicious, or worthless person (Palmatier 1995, 338, 354) are well known, and, reflecting a broader European tradition, have undoubtedly been influenced by the Old Testament. As seen above, Nage snake metaphors are similarly negative. Yet this observation applies to their animal metaphors generally, and, moreover, metaphors exploiting snakes appear more diverse in their range of interpretations than do Western snake metaphors. As discussed previously for birds, several factors affect which snake categories are employed as metaphors and, among those that are, which are employed more extensively. Especially interesting is further evidence for a correlation between metaphorical use and monomial naming. Thus, besides nipa (“snake”), the five individual snake kinds deployed metaphorically are named with single lexemes (ba, gala, goka, hiku, and sawa), and the only monomially designated snake not employed metaphorically is goko, the socalled “Flying snake” Chrysopelea sp.2 Contrariwise, the only binomially (or trinomially) designated snake that occurs as a metaphor is nipa ulu pali, the “two-headed snake,” but since here the metaphor coincides with the entire name – comprising the word for snake (nipa) plus a modifying phrase –

276

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 277

syntactically this hardly differs from an expression like “snake coiled in a hole” (No. 420). On the other hand, neither naming nor empirical factors clearly explain the absence or paucity of some snakes among Nage metaphors. Pythons (goka) are by far the largest snakes known to Nage and are prominent in other ways – practically, as a source of medicine and, since the 1970s, as food (Forth 2016, 195–8) and, symbolically, as the principal embodiment of forest spirits – and yet pythons provide the vehicle of just one metaphor. In addition, there is no reason to believe that pythons are focal to any of the snake metaphors that simply specify nipa (“snake”). Goko, the Flying snake, is not a metaphor even though the snake is definitely familiar to Nage, partly because of its curious ability to “fly” (casting itself from treetops and gliding) but also because of its habit of stealing hen’s eggs. All the same, goko also ranked low in Nage free-lists, whereas the five kinds mentioned earliest and most frequently in the lists – sawa (rat snake), goka (python), ba (Russell’s viper), hiku (pit viper), and gala (bronzeback; Forth 2016, 190) – are precisely the five that occur in Nage metaphors. This evidence attests to what may seem a common-sense connection between the extent to which people are familiar with animals and their metaphorical deployment. Yet it does not explain why metaphors employing ba and gala, the third and fifth in the recall lists, are more numerous than expressions incorporating the other three, which in fact provide just one metaphor each. Among lizards, the two largest kinds, both common, provide the most metaphors. These are the Water monitor (ghoa) and the Tokay gecko (teke), the vehicles of seven and nine metaphors, respectively. Both lizards are also monomially named. Of the three remaining lizards, all named binomially, the skink, mapa bonga, is the source of just three metaphors, and, interestingly enough, in two of these the creature’s name is abbreviated to mapa. The other two, the House lizard and Flying lizard, occur in no metaphors at all. As with the non-metaphorical Flying snake (goko), the Flying lizard’s unusual method of locomotion evidently has not inspired any use as a verbal symbol. Although it is the smallest lizard, the absence of the House lizard from Nage metaphors is perhaps more curious as, being ubiquitous inside houses, it is by far the most frequently encountered. Apart from those incorporating ika, “fish (in general),” Nage metaphors employing creatures they classify as fish incorporate just six of a much larger

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

277

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 278

number of categories. Two of these, moreover, are marine creatures – lobhu (dolphin) and iu (shark) – neither of which is particularly familiar to central Nage, while of the remainder, comprising more familiar freshwater fish, three are named binomially (ana bo, kaka watu, and tebhu teke). The sixth is ipu, “fish fry.” None of four non-exotic freshwater fish known to Nage (Forth 2016, 212, table 9.2) occurs as a metaphor, but apart from their recent introduction, this is consistent with their names – all binomials incorporating ika (fish). In contrast, frogs, although they are small and relatively unremarkable creatures with few practical uses, provide the vehicles of a relatively high number of Nage animal metaphors – ten, or eleven if the single metaphor incorporating “tadpole” (ana fe) is included.3

278

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 279

7 Metaphors with Bugs: Insects and Other Invertebrates

Discussed in this chapter are seventy-five metaphorical expressions incorporating invertebrates – mostly creatures known to the majority of anglophones as “insects” or “bugs.” Unlike “bird,” “snake,” “fish,” “mammal,” and even “lizard,” invertebrates do not compose a single life form for Nage, or any kind of discrete folk taxon more inclusive than the folk-generic. Forth (2016, 329–40) records 113 invertebrate folk-generics (e.g. poi, “grasshopper”; fua, “wasp”) and sixty-four named folk-specifics (e.g., poi godo, a small greenish grasshopper; fua ‘ége ngéke, literally “narrow-waisted wasp”), thus making a total of 177 categories prospectively employable as conventional metaphors. Nage, however, employ just fifty-one of these. Palmatier (1995) identifies forty-four invertebrates used in English metaphors (including “insect” and “spider”), thus not many fewer than in Nage. Curiously, though, Nage metaphors do not include butterflies and moths or, with one arguable exception (No. 533), spiders.1 The fifty-one invertebrate categories employed in Nage metaphors include forty-five folk-generics and six folk-specifics, a fact reflecting the proportionally higher number of named folk-specific taxa in Nage invertebrate taxonomy. Even so, in comparison to other animals, invertebrates are metaphorically underexploited, a circumstance mostly attributable to their small size. What is more, thirty-four of the total fifty-one, including all six of the folk-specifics, occur in just a single metaphor. By contrast, only two mammal categories are used just once – ngo ngoe (No. 155) and dhéke laghi (No. 192) – while the comparable figures for birds are nineteen of forty-nine, and for reptiles and other non-mammalian vertebrates, eight of twenty-two.

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 280

Below I list invertebrates in the same sequence employed in Forth (2016, 329–40), with English translations of individual metaphors listed alphabetically. As was also done in the earlier book, and in order to facilitate comparison between expressions incorporating the same creatures, several kinds of invertebrates are further grouped together under general headings, including grasshoppers and crickets, wasps, ants, and others.

GRASSHOPPERS and CRICKETS • Orthoptera 492. Grasshoppers clustering around dog faeces Poi ligo ta’i lako A person or a group of people immediately drawn to something Like “flies swarming around a sore” (No. 518), the metaphor is essentially the same as English “bees around a honey pot,” or “flies round a dung heap.” Of several kinds of grasshoppers and locusts Nage distinguish by name, one is called “dog faeces grasshopper” (poi ta’i lako), the specific source of the present expression. 493. Little grasshopper Poi sunu ki A small, sickly child The more specific referent is children who are stunted or small for their age as well as not particularly healthy. Poi sunu ki is a folk taxonomic name, denoting a small green kind of grasshopper with a sharp or protruding snout. This last feature would appear to be reflected in the name as sunu ki refers to small, newly emerged, and rather sharp sprouts of Imperata grass (Imperata cyclindrica; Nage ki). Nage, however, disagree over the name, and the original form may be sulu ki, “alighting vertically on Imperata grass stems,” an attributed behaviour of this species, which is further described as being as small or thin as an Imperata stalk. Because the grasshopper is smaller than other kinds of grasshopper, the metaphor is nevertheless in both cases appropriate to a child who is especially small. By the same token, the usage is reminiscent

280

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 281

of American English “knee high to a grasshopper,” although this usually refers to a child who is very young (Palmatier 1995, 224) rather than to one whose growth is retarded. 494. Thighs of a grasshopper Pa’a poi A person who is extremely thin and weak In the form “your thighs are like the thighs of a grasshopper,” the phrase is used to deprecate and taunt adversaries. In a famous oration, a sort of diatribe (bhea) ascribed to Lowa Bata, the ancestor of the clan Deu in the village of Tolo Pa, the phrase complements “having the crown of a rhinoceros beetle” (No. 524). 495. While harvesting look to the front where the little godo grasshopper kicks, (but) do not forget to look to the back where the little ke’o grasshopper rubs its buttocks Pogo bipa latu wa’a ngia ta’a ana poi godo kidha, ma’e ghéwo gula latu wa’a logo ana poi ke’o ta’a ‘oco People and other things that prevent success in an undertaking Poi godo and poi ke’o are folk-taxonomic names for two kinds of grasshoppers. The phrases form part of songs performed during the rice harvest, where the grasshoppers serve as metaphors for all things that can cause rice seed to fall to the ground and thus reduce the size of the yield. 496. Grasshopper eggs Telo poi A decorated textile motif comprising a thin line Grasshopper eggs are laid in yellowish elliptical clusters forming strings of up to three centimetres in length, with one cluster I observed measuring one by 1.5 centimetres. The motif notionally resembles these strings (see Figure 29).

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

281

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 282

Figure 29 Grasshopper eggs motif (No. 496)

497. Cricket [and] tiny bat Cico méca Someone who (unreasonably) considers him- or herself superior to others Not widely known in central Nage, méca is a word for tiny bats in dialects to the northeast; the usual central Nage term is ‘ighu (see No. 248). The metaphor was first recorded as a reference to bothersome children, used by adults mostly as a way of venting annoyance. As applied to adults, however, it describes a person who puts himself before others, for instance a man who – to cite an example given by a female informant – pushes his way to the front of a crowd. According to the same source, crickets and tiny bats are metaphorically deployed in this context because they are very small creatures able to enter cracks and fit into narrow spaces. As explained elsewhere, tiny bats in fact nest inside bamboo internodes, which they enter through cracks (Forth 2016, 283–4).

282

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 283

MANTIS • Dictyoptera 498. Praying mantis on top of a cotton blossom Kaka koda tolo bhena An idle person who waits to be fed Nage describe mantises as sitting motionless while waiting for smaller insect prey to come to them. The metaphor is thus synonymous with “monitor lizard collecting ants” (No. 441).

WASPS • Hymenoptera, superfamily Vespoidea, Vespidae 499. Entering an in-law’s house like a wasp piercing vegetables Nuka sa’o tu’a bhia fua zeka uta A new wife who often returns to her parents This is the female version, as it were, of No. 502. After completion of bridewealth, Nage couples usually take up residence with the husband’s parents, if not in the same house then in the same village. The expression refers more specifically to a newly married woman who, unconventionally, frequently and without good reason returns to her parents’ residence. Nage wives may legitimately visit their parents but only when there is a definite reason for doing so (e.g., to attend a funeral or participate in some other ritual undertaking) and then only in the company of members of their husband’s family – that is, as wife-takers. Selection of the wasp in this metaphor is apparently motivated by the same considerations as apply in No. 502, and both represent inconstancy in conjugal relationships by reference to an insect flying from plant to plant. 500. Hornet striking Ngika tau A blow to the head with something hard; a sudden, very severe pain Ngika is a large hornet whose extremely painful bite Nage describe as possibly fatal. When the hornet strikes, it is said, the stinger makes a noise, like a piece of wood or similar object striking a body. The phrase is used especially with

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

283

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 284

reference to pugilistic competitions (etu), when a competitor delivers a blow to an opponent’s head with a kepo, a sort of cosh described in No. 408. Here, as in other contexts, tau, “to do, make,” has the sense of “to attack.” 501. Small wasp (and) fig sap Ta’i cu’a nana a A stingy, ungenerous person or someone who is unresponsive or unaccommodating Meaning “dirt from a digging stick,” ta’i cu’a is the name of a honey-producing insect resembling a very small wasp. (Although previously described as a wasp [Forth 2016, 331], the creature may in fact be a tiny bee.2) The insects are named for a dark, sticky substance found inside their nests, which clings to their bodies, like soft soil on a digging stick. As a complementary term “fig sap” (nana a) identically refers to a sticky substance that is very difficult to dislodge, thus the two terms together serve as an appropriate metaphor for things – be they material goods, information, or assistance – that an ungenerous person is reluctant to give away. 502. Wasp piercing vegetable blossoms Fua ta’a zeka wonga uta A man who goes from woman to woman The metaphor can refer specifically to a young man who, for a time, works for a woman’s parents with the apparent intention of marrying her, but who after a while becomes attracted to another woman. The motivation is a wasp flitting from plant to plant, thus reflecting the behaviour of an inconstant suitor. “Vegetable blossom” more specifically refers to the blossoms of pumpkins (hea, specifically the ash gourd Benincasa hispida), and, according to Nage, should a wasp pierce these (or, more particularly, what is apparently the female flower), then no fruit will develop and the plant will be ruined. Evidently described here is an insect behaviour known as “nectar robbing.” Practised by wasps, bees, other insects, and even some birds and mammals, this involves “stealing” nectar by perforating floral tissue rather than entering from the floral opening and thereby contributing to pollination – although possibly contrary to the Nage view, this is not always harmful to the plant

284

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 285

(Irwin et al. 2010). Why wasps in particular are employed as the vehicle for this metaphor is unclear, but, insofar as the same behaviour motivates No. 499, it is possible that prosody plays the decisive role in view of the assonance of fua (wasp) and uta, and in the earlier metaphor also the rhyme with tu’a (a wife’s parents or, prospectively, the parents of the abandoned woman in the present metaphor). 503. Yellow wasp whose sting hurts straightaway, narrow-waisted wasp whose bite is very painful Fua te’a ta’a kiki ‘o méma, fua ‘ége ngéke ta’a kiki ‘o ‘é’e People of the opposite sex who are capable of harming one another These are lyrics of a néke song performed by women and men in turns and warning members of the opposite sex that they risk harm, or can be “bitten” (kiki), if they become involved with the singers. “Yellow wasp” and “narrowwaisted wasp” are both folk-taxonomic names denoting different kinds of wasps, the latter being known in English as “thread-waisted wasps.” Most commentators understood “narrow-waisted wasp” as a specific reference to a woman, the similar anatomical feature in humans being considered a mark of female beauty, and accordingly “yellow wasp” as a reference to a man.

ANTS • Hymenoptera, superfamily Vespoidea, Formicidae 504. Ant that carries coconut dregs on its head Metu su’u pe’a A person who takes on a weighty task without positive results Nage possess no completely inclusive term for “ant.” Metu, however, denotes several kinds of small, red-coloured ants, each distinguished by a qualifier (e.g., metu lade), and it may be consistent with this that metu occurs in the majority of ant metaphors, though mule, designating a kind of black ant, comes a close second. A standard binary composite referring to ants in general is metu mule. In the present expression the worthlessness of coconut dregs (pe’a) – coconut flesh from which the milk has already been pressed – is crucial to the metaphor, as it is to No. 505.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

285

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 286

505. Ant that repeatedly carries off coconut dregs Metu pa’u pe’a A person who regularly causes trouble or who brings trouble to a community Apparently informing this metaphor is the fact that, when carrying off coconut dregs, ants will come back several times to a single spot to collect more. Otherwise, commentators provided a number of somewhat diverse interpretations. These included: a person who engages repeatedly in an act; someone who continually causes trouble; a person who does not fit in or get along with others; someone who brings other people’s problems “to places where these are not necessary or appropriate”; a person who moves from place to place; and someone who introduces outsiders to a community who then cause trouble. The last interpretation, which overlaps some of the others, seemed especially pertinent. 506. Ant that smells meat Metu mazo poza A person from whom it is difficult to keep anything hidden, and who eventually discovers what others are trying to conceal According to Nage, the metaphor has its basis in the ability of ants to find their way to food that is hidden away or out of sight. 507. Nose like an ant Bhia izu metu A person who simply appears at a gathering where meat is being consumed, typically a sacrificial ritual, without being invited; someone from whom it is difficult to hide anything As one commentator gave as an example a wife or children who always find tobacco or money a man has saved for himself, the metaphor is partly synonymous with the preceding (No. 506). Also, the entomological motivation is the same – ants attracted by food or the remains of human food. (Cf. Indonesian ada gula ada semut, “where there is sugar there are ants.”)

286

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 287

508. Red ants and black ants Metu mule A large number of people assembled in a single place As the two ant terms in combination convey the sense of ants in general, the resultant phrase, conveying so comprehensive a connotation, serves as an appropriate metaphor for a multitude of humans – or, as one might say, “all sorts of people.” 509. Black ants on top of a bamboo fence Mule tolo mada A couple who enter into a conjugal relationship without bridewealth or before marriage payments are complete The relationship to which this metaphor refers differs from illicit sex (which has its own, separate metaphors) since it concerns couples who themselves initiate a conjugal relationship, openly cohabit, and may bear several children before any bridewealth is paid. Typically, such unions are also accepted by both sets of parents and can be as durable as other marriages. Mada refers to a high bamboo fence constructed inside a village to provide an enclosure for special public events such as large-scale buffalo sacrificing (pa sése) and etu (annual pugilistic competitions). Mule are black ants typically encountered on tree trunks and branches, and, as Nage remark, wherever there is a mada these ants will be found crawling along the top. As was further explained, two ants coming from opposite directions and meeting in the middle of a fence top will, after sniffing one another, usually go off together in a single direction. 510. Numerous as black ants in the hills, as dense as fish fry in the estuary Woso bhia mule zéle wolo, kapa bhia ipu lau nanga A large number of offspring or descendants Nage employ these phrases in rites of offering to ancestors and other beneficent spiritual entities, requesting that humans and livestock be prolific and multiply. Comparable usages employing mammals and birds include Nos. 123 and 270. Although “hill, highland” is a more specific sense, wolo can more

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

287

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 288

generally mean “dry land” in contrast to bodies of water. Like other parallelistic metaphors employed in ritual address, therefore, creatures of the dry land are here contrasted with creatures of the river or sea. In this instance, of course, the two sorts of animals concerned are also ones that occur in extremely large numbers. 511. Tree ant’s backside ‘Obo mesa A person with large, protruding buttocks Usually expressed as “having buttocks like a mesa ant,” the phrase is most often applied to a woman. The ant named mesa, typically found in trees, is distinguished from other ants by a gaster (abdomen) that points upwards and is therefore especially noticeable.

BEES • Hymenoptera, superfamily Apoidea 512. Bees inside a cavity (nest) ‘Ua one hodo A person who mumbles or speaks incoherently; several people speaking simultaneously so that one cannot make out what they are saying When applied to several people, the metaphor obviously recalls the English expression “buzz of conversation.” ‘Ua apparently denotes the bee Apis indica or A. cerana indica. 513. Honey-bees have hung their nests, (other) bees have suspended their hives Ani ne dadi, eo ne tépo People who maintain long residence in a place or who possess much experience of something The metaphor is sometimes employed in self-reference (“I am/we are bees that have hung their nests …”). Ani are a kind of honey bee (Apis dorsata) that suspends nests from tree branches. By contrast, Nage describe ‘ua, another

288

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 289

kind of honey bee (see No. 512), as typically nesting in cavities in or near the ground, thus explaining why ani is the vehicle of the present metaphor. Rather than a separate species, eo, bees described as occupying part of the same nests, apparently refers to drones. Dadi and tépo, “to hang, suspend,” are synonyms, while “nests” and “hives” is a distinction required only for purposes of translation. The parallelistic expression refers to the fact that hives can be inhabited for a long time or rebuilt in the same place. Applied to humans, the metaphor usually conveys a positive assessment, alluding to rights acquired or affirmed through a group’s long occupation of a territory. According to another interpretation, it refers not so much to long occupation of a place but to people who have travelled far and gained much experience before finally settling down. Ne is an abbreviation of négha, “already,” a usual way of registering the past tense. 514. Orphan bee ‘Ua ta’a ana halo A person who lacks family or companions More specific interpretations included a person or small family that does not possess or associate with other kin, and a couple with few or no children who therefore have few people to turn to for assistance. The metaphor reflects the Nage observation that, while bees characteristically occur in swarms, occasionally one can encounter a single bee or a small number of bees – for example, when a few remain after the majority have abandoned a nest. I also recorded the expression as ani ana halo (see No. 513). 515. Other bees have suspended their hives, eo ne tépo. See Honey-bees have hung their nests (No. 513).

FLIES and MOSQUITOES • Diptera 516. Fly alighting on sores Hale celo teka A person who frequently changes what he or she is doing

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

289

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 290

Celo more exactly means “to alight successively in various places, flying hither and yon,” and here more specifically describes a fly moving from sore to sore among a herd of animals and not remaining long on any single sore. The human “fly” can be someone who similarly moves from place to place. But probably a more usual application is someone who frequently changes tasks, not finishing any one before moving on to another (as in the expression kema bhia na’a hale celo teka, “to work like a fly moving from sore to sore”). This, then, is one of a number of Nage metaphors that express disapproval of people who are inconstant in their efforts and will start a task before completing another. According to another interpretation, the metaphor can also refer to someone who keeps changing sides in a dispute. In as much as it depicts insects moving quickly from place to place, the Nage usage might recall English “blue-arsed fly” (apparently a bluebottle or blowfly, a kind Nage call hale mite, “black, dark fly”), which refers to a person who is excessively busy, hurrying from task to task. 517. Fly following a sore Hale dhéko teka A person who habitually follows another The metaphor is motivated by the habit of flies persistently following ulcerated sores on the bodies of livestock as the animals move about. Several specific interpretations were recorded: someone always quick to take advantage of a situation, thus an opportunist; a person who continually pursues another, perhaps seeking support or assistance, and who is difficult to get rid of; and a group of people, for example a gang of youngsters, who follow a person around, especially a stranger or visitor whom they find curious or interesting. Tule (1998, 94) lists a cognate expression in central Keo (ade dhéko neka) as a reference to “loyal followers,” but this meaning seems not to be recognized by Nage. 518. Flies swarming around a sore Hale mole teka A number of males drawn to an attractive woman

290

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 291

In this expression, hale is always understood in the plural (flies). The metaphor is virtually identical to English “bees around a honey pot” (see also No. 492). 519. Mosquitoes and flies Emu hale People who are “small” and socially insignificant, or children or other people who are bothersome From both the small size of these flying insects and the obvious ways in which they annoy humans, the motivation for this metaphor is straightforward, and in both respects the usage is comparable to “bedbugs [and] dog fleas” (see No. 536). In the first sense the metaphor can be expressed as an admonition, “do not follow people who are mosquitoes and flies” (ma’e dhéko ta’a ata ta’a emu hale), meaning “do not emulate, trust, or have faith in insignificant people, people of little account.” Dhéko, “to follow,” can also mean “to believe (in).” As a reference to insignificant humans, Nage “mosquitoes and flies” is synonymous with English “insect” in the sense of “an insignificant or contemptible person” (Oxford English Reference Dictionary).

BEETLES • Coleoptera 520. Dung beetle informs the earthquake Banga soke ebu A bringer of false news, especially a report that causes others to act unnecessarily or inappropriately A slightly different interpretation offered by one informant concerns someone who cannot keep a secret and will pass on whatever he or she hears, regardless of its veracity. The metaphor derives from a belief concerning earthquakes (ebu weo). Nage say tremours occur when a dung beetle (banga or banga ta’i) is unable to find dung (ta’i) and so incorrectly infers that humans have vanished from the earth. This the beetle communicates to Ebu – which can be understood as a reference either to the earthquake personified or, as Nage explain, to god (ga’e déwa). To test this, god (or the earthquake) then shakes the earth to see if he can get a response. Whenever earth tremours

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

291

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 292

occur, therefore, Nage pound on floors and walls of houses while crying out “we are still here” (kami manga) so that god will know that the beetle’s report was false and stop the shaking. As the term for “grandparent, ancestor,” ebu evidently derives from a different protoform than does ebu in the sense of “earthquake,” a cognate of Ngadha repu (Arndt 1961) and eastern Sumbanese upung (Onvlee 1984 s.v.). Affirming the sense of “earthquake,” the more complete form of the Nage term is ebu weo (weo, “to shake”). All these ideas further inform the lyrics of a song: “Earthquake shakes and shudders, dung beetle digs in the earth, oh we are here” (ebu weo kéko wéjo, ana banga kore tana, o kami dia ma manga). 521. Dung beetle’s antenna grass Ego tadu banga A kind of grass The plant is so named because its seeds bear some resemblance to the beetle’s “horns” (antennae). Ego names several kinds of grasses (cf. No. 540). 522. Fireflies Lépe kobe Many lights or fires seen at a distance in the night Modifying unanalyzable lépe, kobe is “night.” Usually expressed as “like fireflies,” the expression can refer, for example, to hunters’ overnight camps made during the annual collective hunt (to’a lako). 523. Neck like a banana beetle Tengu bhia ko’o muku te’a A person who is too compliant, who gives in too easily to a request Most likely a member of the Cerambycidae, “banana beetle” refers to a small yellow beetle with dark markings which Nage compare to a “ripe banana” (muku te’a). Apparently referring to the beetle also called fugu kune (kune is “yellow”; Forth 2016, 333), I first recorded the name muku te’a in 2017. Nage know the beetle especially for its habit of moving its head up and down as if nodding in agreement – a gesture that, among Nage as among Westerners, signifies assent, acknowledgment, or understanding. A traditional children’s

292

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 293

game involves a youngster holding onto a specimen and addressing the creature with the phrases: “Ripe banana (beetle), you give me a chicken, you give me a piglet (or a foal or buffalo calf)” (Muku te’a muku te’a, kau ti’i nga’o me’a ana manu, ti’i nga’o ana wawi [ana ja, ana bhada]). After each request the speaker waits until the insect nods its head as if in agreement, and she or he may then proceed with another request. Since there is no expectation that the request will be granted, this is not a magical rite. However, one elderly man mentioned how, as a child, he would feel strange when witnessing such a tiny creature nod its head as though human and understanding what was being said. For a large part, the metaphor is synonymous to a horse metaphor (No. 47). As a negative evaluation and accusation, it appears to be used most often between spouses. 524. Crown (top of the head) of a rhinoceros beetle Todo moco A bald head or a bald-headed man The beetle’s head and a bald man’s pate are both shiny. The expression seems mostly to be used as an insult, as in a diatribe delivered by a famous ancestor, where it complements “grasshopper’s thighs” (No. 494). 525. Rhinoceros beetle’s rump Bui moco The (human) fingertip This is the only term for this body part. The motivation is not just the beetle’s shape and size, corresponding to the tip of an adult human’s finger, but its brownish-red colour as well. The metaphor is not applied to non-humans, for example, to the fingertips of monkeys. 526. Spun like a rhinoceros beetle Leo moco Someone who is easily threatened or abused Leo moco is a children’s pastime in which a rhinoceros beetle is tied to a string and swung around in the air. When addressed to a person, “you will be like

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

293

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 294

a swinging beetle” (kau bhia leo moco) constitutes a threat to the effect that, if the addressee does not comply with the speaker’s demands, he or she will be subject to the same treatment as the beetle in the children’s game. 527. Weevil holes Lia suse Pits in the skin that develop in extremely old people Suse are small weevils of the family Curculionidae that characteristically bore into dried maize and other stored goods. Nage do not regard the holes that appear on an old person’s skin as actually having been made by weevils but only as resembling holes weevils bore, for example, into dried maize cobs. Evidently referring to some skin condition, Nage say the pits – also referred to simply as suse (“weevils”) – appear on the skin of only a minority of people who reach an unusually advanced age (Forth 2018a). This I have never witnessed myself – not surprisingly, as Nage also claim that local people no longer live to such advanced ages, although they did in the past.

TRUE BUGS • Hemiptera 528. Cicadas calling Naju ta’a ie The wailing or whining of small children This is one of numerous metaphors typically uttered by parents in exasperation, when criticizing or reprimanding children or simply complaining about their crying. The call of cicadas comprises a continuous shrill, high-pitched, and rather penetrating sound produced by large numbers of the insects simultaneously rubbing their limbs together. 529. Meci pepper Ko meci A sort of pepper The colour of this small, round pepper is greenish, like the insect called meci, described as resembling a small cicada.

294

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 295

530. Stinkbug whose head has been squeezed Hengo ta’a pese ulu A person who behaves forcefully or aggressively but quickly becomes subdued when a superior arrives. Explaining the metaphor, commentators remarked how stinkbugs quickly die when their heads are squeezed between the thumb and forefinger, the usual way of killing them. Hengo denotes members of the Coreidae, of which Nage distinguish two kinds. Referring to the Green padi bug Leptocorisa acuta, one of these is named hengo ‘é’e (“bad hengo”). Since this is the kind that does damage to rice and because its smell is deemed more unpleasant than the other, larger sort of stinkbug, the vehicle of this metaphor is more likely to be the padi bug.

OTHER INSECTS 531. Chicken lice Kutu manu A bothersome person or mischievous, misbehaving children who will not heed warnings Infesting domestic fowls, these lice, though they do not bite humans, can infest people’s bodies and clothing and cause considerable irritation. One occurrence of the metaphor is in the lyrics of sort of a victory chant performed by men of ‘Abu village, led by members of the clan Tegu (“Thunder”). During the annual ritual hunt, they will exclaim: “‘Abu men are chicken lice, one can scratch but the discomfort remains” (‘Abu kutu manu, sasi pau ogi esi latu). This means that, however one responds to the actions of ‘Abu people, their effects will endure. The usage is one of relatively few instances in which animal metaphors are employed self-referentially. 532. Cockroach on the edge of a plate Ngozo wiwi kula A person who remains silent when others speak and does not participate in a discussion

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

295

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 296

Wiwi, “lip,” here refers to the edge of a gourd-shell vessel (kula; see figure 30). Traditionally used as plates during collective, ritual meals, the inside surfaces of the vessels are blackened with soot, which acts as a preservative. Not always deterred by the soot, however, cockroaches will consume the relatively soft interiors of the vessels, especially when these are stored in dark, smoky places above hearths. The image of a cockroach silently bobbing its head seems also to contribute to the metaphor. While ngozo refers to one of two kinds of cockroaches recognized by Nage, it is nevertheless the other kind (named pegi) that is more usually found inside houses and is therefore more likely to infest gourd vessels. The specification of ngozo in the present metaphor is therefore curious, and commentators could only suggest that ngozo may be used because it “sounds better” (Forth 2015, 391–2). However, further insight may be gained from comparison with neighbouring languages. For “cockroach” in Ngadha, Arndt (1961) thus lists only ngozo, at the same time recording three compounds of the same word that make no reference to the insect. These are ngozo ngica (ngica = Nage ngia, “face”), “to stick the head out (or forward) in order to hear, see, ask a question, and so on”; papa ngozo, “to approach one another closely, come face to face”; and ngozo dho, “engrossed, absorbed in oneself ” or “rapt (in thought),” and to “sit in silence.” Especially this last sense recalls the behaviour of persons Nage compare to a “cockroach on the edge of a dish,” and it is therefore possible that the Ngadha usages either express senses of ngozo that have been lost in Nage or reflect metaphorical uses of “cockroach” (ngozo) that are not articulated in Arndt’s glosses. It is also possible that the Nage metaphor has been adopted from Ngadha. 533. Cockroach slamming into a spider’s web Pegi ni’o kaka meo A person performing a task in a laboured, awkward, or unsteady and therefore inefficient way The expression is typically employed in derisive criticism of someone making a bad job of something. Usually denoting a spider, kaka meo in this context has the alternate sense of “spider’s web.” While ni’o generally means “to slam, ram into,” it especially refers to male thrusting during sexual intercourse. It seems to retain this connotation here, although the animal behaviour depicted is in fact a cockroach that has slammed into a web and tries to extricate

296

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 297

Figure 30 Gourd-shell vessels (No. 532)

itself (thus quickly moving backwards and forwards). One recorded application was to an old and incompetent man slowly and awkwardly climbing a palm tree. Earlier reported local interpretations of the metaphor, including two people colliding and a lower-ranking man involved in a sexual relationship with a higher-ranking woman (Forth 2015, 391), now appear to be, if not inaccurate, then too specific and so insufficiently representative. 534. Small cockroach Hipa ngapi A worthless, insignificant person Described by one man as referring to someone without ideas or cares, the metaphor is often expressed as “having a mind like a hipa ngapi” (ngai zede bhia hipa ngapi). Translated here as “mind,” the concept of ngai zede was discussed earlier with reference to a dog and pig metaphor (No. 86). Whether hipa ngapi refers to an animal of any particular sort is controversial. Some Nage interpret hipa as a name for the Oriental cockroach Blatta orientalis

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

297

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 298

(Forth 2016, 336). Although most people are not familiar with this meaning, it is nonetheless interesting that the other component, ngapi, occurs as part of an invertebrate name in some dialects of Lio (Arndt 1933) – ngapi te’e, “centipede.” In both Nage and Ngadha, ngapi can mean “cliff, cliff face,” “rocky ledge.” But many people understand hipa ngapi as no more than a vague reference to a small, unknown, and insignificant creature of no specific kind. Some commentators said the metaphor refers especially to small children, particularly in regard to their lack of knowledge and understanding (and particularly in situations in which this is found annoying), but others disagreed. 535. Termite Ghane Someone who appears honourable but has unseen negative qualities Ghane denotes a kind of termite Nage describe as infesting only the lower portion of wooden house posts set in the ground, where the insect’s destructive activity goes unnoticed. By contrast, termites that infest parts of house posts or other wooden components located above ground are called ngana, a term not used as a metaphor. Since infestations of ngana are deemed “inauspicious” (pie, a term also meaning “taboo”; Forth 2016, 243), however, these insects are the subject of another sort of symbolic representation. 536. Bedbugs and dog fleas (1) Maju mela People, especially young children, whose behaviour is found irritating and annoying The names of the two insects, both of which regularly occur in Nage houses, are combined to form a standard binary composite. As applied to children, the metaphor is synonymous with “mosquitoes and flies” (No. 519), and in both cases the reference to bothersome humans is reminiscent of English “bug” in the sense of “to bother, annoy, or irritate someone” (Palmatier 1995, 44). In a cleansing ceremony, maju mela refers synecdochically to all undesirable qualities that are ritually removed from a house.

298

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 299

537. Bedbugs and dog fleas (2) Maju mela The smallest or least significant of things associated with a particular place Semantically quite distinct from No. 536, this usage is listed as a separate metaphor. Should all residents of a house leave together, for example to undertake a long journey, people might sarcastically remark: “You’re all going, leaving nothing behind, having even beaten the walls and floors to remove the bedbugs and dog fleas” (Miu la’a zebu mona ési, ‘imo maju mela dhega begha). A comparable English expression is “taking everything but the kitchen sink,” a similarly sarcastic assessment describing, for example, someone who packs a great deal of luggage for a trip. In the Nage usage, however, the house becomes emptied not just of material possessions but of all living occupants. 538. Crawling bedbug Maju laka A person who moves very slowly The metaphor expresses disapproval of someone who moves or does something too slowly. 539. Bedbug mango Pau maju A variety of mango The tree is so named because its fruit has an unpleasant odour reminiscent of the smell of bedbugs. The fruit is nevertheless eaten. 540. Dog flea grass Ego mela A kind of grass or weed Although Nage confirmed that mela here refers to the flea, the motivation remains unclear. A plant that Ngadha call mata mela (mata is “eye,” “source”) has been identified as Oxalis corniculata (Verheijen 1990, 31), Creeping woodsorrel.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

299

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 300

INSECT LARVAE 541. Arse like a maggot (or worm) Bhia ‘obo ne’e ule A person who cannot keep still Besides “maggot,” ule covers a variety of insect larva, most of which wriggle and squirm. The sense is similar to English “ants in one’s pants.” 542. Bamboo on one side of the village, its stem appears fine, but a grub is boring inside Bheto zale ghoe, alu podi modhe, bholo ta’a ule kore one Something or someone that appears good from the outside but is essentially bad The phrases occur in the lyrics of a song. Although generally applied to insect larvae, here ule is more specifically interpreted as referring to a grub that infests a kind of giant bamboo (bheto). As a direction term, zale, which in central Nage refers to the direction to one’s left as one faces towards the “head” (upper end) of a village or towards the peak of the Ebu Lobo volcano, appears quite arbitrary. On the other hand, it seems relevant that, when combined with one (“inside”) to form zale one, the two terms in combination mean “inside” (as in zale one sa’o, “inside the house”). In regard to its referent, the entire expression is synonymous with “termite” (No. 535). 543. Grub sniffing its own arse Doko sengu ‘obo A quiet, inactive person who rarely leaves the house Doko names a large grub growing to a length of several centimetres and described as the larval stage of cicadas and beetles. When immobile, the grub curls up with its head in close proximity to its tail, straightening out in order to move. The phrase can also apply to the sleeping position of a human similarly disposed, that is, someone assuming a foetal position.

300

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 301

544. Grub that eats rice plants from the roots up Doko ta’a gho pae A person who does harm that is not initially detected Gho, here translated as “to eat,” more specifically means “to pull, haul, drag.” As Nage note, doko grubs nest in the earth of cultivated fields, where they will consume rice stems by feeding on the roots. As regards its human referent, therefore, the metaphor appears similar to Nos. 535 and 542. However, according to one commentator, it especially applies to shiftless children who do not work but simply live off their parents, an interpretation that apparently identifies a family (parents and children) with a house – that is, an interior place that, in this case, is gradually being damaged by an undesirable internal relationship (cf. No. 13). In regard to grubs nesting in, or under, the earth, it should be noted that zale (or zale one) means both “under, beneath” and “inside.” 545. Mosquito larva Méto A person who is restless and cannot keep still, a fidget Mosquito larvae, in English also known as “wrigglers,” constantly move and squirm in water, thus providing an appropriate metaphor for someone who fidgets, moving about compulsively and unnecessarily, and who cannot keep still (in one instance recorded as “you sit like a mosquito larva,” kau podhu bhia ko’o méto kau). A variant expression is “having an arse like a mosquito larva” (sama ‘obo ne’e méto), a synonym of “having an arse like a maggot” (No. 541). 546. Small caterpillars Ngota Livestock that do damage to cultivated fields The caterpillars occur in large irruptions every several years, and the damage they then do to crops identifies them metaphorically with larger animals that do the same. Ancestral legends commonly ascribe the movement of human groups to swarms of ngota invading houses and thus rendering settlements uninhabitable (Forth 2016, 240–1).

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

301

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 302

ARACHNIDS As a class distinct from insects, arachnids include spiders, scorpions, ticks, and mites. For present purposes, the distinction is hardly significant, yet it is noteworthy that, of the foregoing, only scorpions and mites are employed as metaphors, and I was unable to find any expressions employing spiders. 547. Rat mites Tumu dhéke Bothersome children Also called ma dhéke, the mites, too small to be seen, deliver painful, vexatious bites that Nage compare to the annoyance caused by obstreperous children who plague adults with noisy and unruly behaviour. The usage is thus one of a number of Nage metaphors with the same reference. 548. Scorpion down in the lowlands bites and causes pain but (the wound) does not bleed, Éko teko zi mala kiki ‘o mona ‘a. See Leech up in the hills bites and draws blood but (the wound) does not hurt (No. 563)

CRUSTACEANS Like insects and arachnids, crustaceans are arthropods. Among these, Nage make noticeable metaphoric use of crayfish (freshwater prawns) and crabs. “Crayfish” also forms one half of a standard composite denoting all freshwater foods, kuza tuna (“crayfish [and] eels”). 549. Arms like the claws of a crayfish Lima bhia anga kuza Someone who, at a collective meal or feast, helps himself to a lot of food; a greedy or voracious person Unmodified kuza names a Giant river prawn Macrobrachium sp., the largest sort of freshwater crustacean known to Nage. Nage nomenclature further distinguishes three growth stages of the prawn: ngoi (see No. 552), faja, and

302

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 303

lado ngao (No. 553). Related to kanga (human fingers and toes and the digits of certain vertebrate animals), anga refers exclusively to the claws, or pincers, of crustaceans and scorpions. Especially since the claws of a crayfish are large in proportion to their overall size, the metaphor is somewhat reminiscent of the English expression “having long fingers” (or being “long-fingered”) – a usage that corresponds exactly to Nage kanga léwa and refers to a thief. However, “having arms like crayfish claws” does not refer to a thief, or at least is not usually employed in this way. A plant metaphor for a thief is koba paga, “vines of the bitter gourd Momordica charantia,” which similarly are long and rambling. 550. Crayfish have bellies, Kuza ne’e tuka. See Frogs have livers (No. 481) 551. Crayfish at Au Galu retreats a long way Kuza Au Galu medhi léwa latu A person who retreats in order to avoid harm The expression is a lyric in a planting song. Au Galu is a waterside location in central Nage. The metaphor can more specifically describe a competitor in the pugilistic competition called etu, who moves backwards in order to avoid a blow. Otherwise, it refers to anyone who is sensibly cautious. The metaphor reflects the Nage observation that crustaceans often move backwards rather than forwards. Palmatier (1995, 99) records American English “crawfish” (a dialectal variant of “crayfish”), which he defines as “to retreat from a position” and explains as reflecting “the fact that all lobsterlike crustaceans, including the crawfish, have the capability of moving rapidly backward by forcing their large, flexible tail downward, again and again, until they have retreated from danger.” 552. Each pool has its own crayfish Ne’e tiwu ne’e ngoi ngata Every region or settlement has its own distinctive character Ngoi denotes a river prawn (Macrobrachium sp.) at an early stage of growth, but selection of the term may largely be determined by the alliterative effect of ngoi and ngata.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

303

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 304

553. Large crayfish Lado ngao A woman who is bold and aggressive; a person who is forceful and unwilling to accept defeat This expression was first explained as referring to “a woman who acts like a man,” or a woman who is confrontational and will not be subordinated (particularly to men), and there is a common view that the metaphor applies either exclusively or especially to females. In fact, Nage apply it to both men and women. Denoting the mature form of the Giant river prawn, lado ngao means “blue-green antennae” and describes a physical feature of the prawns. The only motivation commentators could suggest for the metaphor concerned the larger size of these prawns and their ability to dominate smaller prawns. Yet possibly also relevant is the further use of lado to denote ceremonial headdresses worn by high-ranking men. Women to whom the metaphor is applied can include females who do not demur at engaging in sex with other women’s husbands, but this apparently does not reflect Nage ideas about the behaviour of large crustaceans. 554. Small freshwater prawn Kuza kela A person who is bent over or hunchbacked This is the folk taxonomic name of a smaller kind of freshwater prawn (kuza), distinct from the Giant prawn Macrobrachium sp. Kela is “cane grass.” As the usual expression is “having a back like a kuza kela” (logo bhia kuza kela), alluding to the crustacean’s curved back, the motivation appears straightforward. However, one man interpreted the metaphor as referring instead to a dirty person, with regard to dark stripes or marks on the prawn’s back. 555. Crayfish (or prawn) plant Uta kuza A kind of wild plant Uta denotes a large class of leafy vegetables, both domestic and wild, and can contextually refer to vegetable food in general. Nage explained the name with reference both to the plant growing in watery places and a practice of cooking the leaves with freshwater prawns. 304

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 305

556. Crab in the river Doga advances in pretence Moga lowo Doga je podi we’e A person who pretends to be friendly Following “crayfish at Au Galu” (No. 551), this expression occurs in a planting song. Lowo Doga is a stream close to the main central Nage village of Bo’a Wae, but its selection is obviously motivated by the rhyme with moga (freshwater crab). The occurrence of je podi we’e, otherwise interpreted as a bird metaphor (No. 390), is noteworthy since, in this phrase, je is not the name of a bird but a verb meaning “to advance slowly” and describes the sideways motion characteristic of crabs. The human referent thus recalls the English idiom “to sidle up” (meaning “to ingratiate oneself ”). The identification of the crab as a false friend is further revealed in No. 557. 557. Crab companion Moko moga An apparent friend who nevertheless does a person harm The treacherous friend may prove harmful, for example, by regularly teasing or annoying a person or not telling the truth. Nage explain the metaphor with reference to the pinching habit of crabs, but prosody evidently plays a part as well, as is clear from the resemblance of moga and moko (“friend, companion, comrade”). A less common variant of the metaphor is moko kojo, where kojo designates saltwater crabs, an expression that is analyzable in much the same way. In Indonesian, “rock crab” (kepiting batu) is a metaphor for a stingy, tight-fisted person, but in Nage miserliness is expressed with other animal metaphors (see, e.g., No. 501). 558. Monkey and crab. See ‘o’a ne’e moga (No. 220) 559. Crab’s pincers Ngi’i kojo A gangway of stones and earth that connects lower with higher flat level areas (teda) within a village Kojo denotes a marine crab. The structures are so named because they are seen to resemble a crab’s pincers (ngi’i, otherwise the word for “tooth, teeth”). I first recorded the usage in the Keo region, on Flores’s south central coast, I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

305

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 306

but later discovered it is also used in central Nage. The structures are alternatively called kota, but as this applies to stone walls in general, “crab’s pincers” is a more specific term. 560. Large fry trick (or mislead) small fry Podhe ‘ole ipu A more powerful person who, through deceit, makes use of people less powerful The metaphor applies particularly where the party misled consequently suffers misfortune not suffered by the one who misleads. In related Florenese languages podhe denotes freshwater crab larvae, but Nage know it only as the name of an unfamiliar sea creature somewhat larger than ipu, the fry of freshwater fish (see Nos. 469–71). They also know that podhe ascend from the sea and enter rivers shortly before the fish fry, but, although they always go first, Nage say, podhe invariably manage to elude capture, unlike the smaller fry that people catch in large numbers. Hence this provides another case in which people are mostly unfamiliar with an animal that provides the vehicle of a metaphor and yet know just enough about its behaviour to construct an interpretation. Expressed as podhe ndore ipu, virtually the same metaphor is found in south coastal regions of Lio, where ndore means “to lead, take the lead” and podhe are recognized as the immature form of freshwater crabs named mongga or mbongga (cf. Nage moga).

EARTHWORMS, CENTIPEDES, and LEECHES 561. Earthworm able to emerge from the earth but unable to re-enter Ta’i hati gedho be’o kono kéwo A person who enters a situation from which he or she is subsequently unable to extricate him- or herself Here translated as “to be able,” be’o more generally means “to know,” while kéwo, “to be unable,” can also mean “no longer to know something” or “to be unable to recall” (in contrast to ghéwo, “to forget”). The expression usually refers to someone who incurs a debt but is later unable to repay or who com-

306

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 307

mits to an undertaking but cannot see it through and, thus, is largely synonymous with a rat metaphor (No. 189). As explained elsewhere, the metaphor reflects the Nage conviction that earthworms, once they have emerged from the soil, can never re-enter and so always die on the surface (Forth 2016, 259– 60). According to a slightly different version, earthworms may be able to re-enter the ground but only at a different spot and then one never sees them do so. But this is likely a rationalization of the more categorical idea, and it is this that finds expression in a magical practice whereby, in order to disable a witch, one should grind up a desiccated worm and surreptitiously place it in the suspected witch’s drink (nowadays, hot coffee is the beverage of choice). In this way, after the malevolent spirit (wa) of the witch leaves the witch’s body to cause harm, it will no longer be able to re-enter, and the witch will be powerless. To ensure its efficacy, the magical actor recites the above metaphor, proclaiming that the malevolent spirit supposedly possessed by the victim will become like the earthworm. An alternative, apparently less common, and perhaps more recent use of the metaphor is as an admonition addressed to people, especially adolescents, who leave the house and do not return when they should, staying out until well after sunset. In addition to a metaphor, Nage employ the notion of earthworms unable to return to the earth as a riddle: “(It is) able to go out but unable to go in, what is it?” The answer, of course, is an earthworm. 562. Earthworm struck by the sun Ta’i hati ta’a gena leza A person who is no longer capable, who has lost a former ability or enthusiasm for some activity As Nage remark, earthworms shrivel and die from exposure to the sun, an observation likely connected with the notion expressed in the preceding metaphor (No. 561). One man interpreted the expression as describing someone suffering from heat exhaustion, but this seems not to be the main reference. 563. Leech up in the hills bites and draws blood but (the wound) does not hurt, scorpion down in the lowlands bites and causes pain but (the wound) does not bleed Mate ze kéli kiki ‘a mona ‘o, éko teko zi mala kiki ‘o mona ‘a

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

307

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 308

Some people cause harm that cannot be felt while others cause pain but leave no visible injury As Nage pointed out, the unseen character of injury caused by a leech is compounded by the fact that bleeding occurs only after the creature has fallen off or been removed from the skin. According to a more specific interpretation, the phrases contrast a person who harms another using words alone (the leech’s method) – either in direct confrontation or by slander – with a person who attacks someone physically. Combining two parallel phrases, the expression occurs in songs accompanying circle-dancing but also functions as a proverb and – with the subjects (leech and scorpion) removed – as a riddle (“it hurts but does not bleed, it bleeds but does not hurt”). In song, the phrases describing the contrasting creatures are often rendered as ro iwa ra and ra iwa ro. As iwa is the negative in Lio and the Ja’o dialect of Endenese (cf. Nage mona), where “blood” is ra (central Nage ‘a) and “to be painful” (Nage ‘o) is ro, the expression has apparently been adopted from the east. 564. Legs and arms of a centipede Taga lima héte te’e An unusually large number of people The metaphor especially applies when many people assemble to carry out a task, so the work is completed quickly. As Nage normally describe centipedes as possessing only legs (taga), “legs and arms” apparently refers more to the human referents than to the chilipod.

GASTROPODS 565. Eyeballs like a snail Li’e mata bhia ko’o boko lo A person with large, round, and protruding eyes Having the same human referent as gecko and frog metaphors (Nos. 452, 476), the phrase alludes to the tentacles or “eye stalks” of land snails, at the ends of which the eyes are located. Relevant comparisons are English “bug-eyed” (where “bug” apparently has the colloquial American sense of a small crawling

308

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 309

or creeping animal) and “bug out,” both identically referring to people with bulging eyes. 566. Moving like a slug La’a bhia ko’o lema la Someone who walks very slowly Also recorded as la’a lema la na’a (where na’a expresses resemblance), lema la, the sole Nage term for slugs, literally means “protruding tongue” and so is itself obviously metaphorical. The longer expression is synonymous with English “sluggish” and “moving at a snail’s pace.” Summary Remarks Invertebrate categories used as metaphors reveal a preference for monomial taxa (categories named with single lexemes, or “words”) similar to what was found for vertebrate animals. Of the forty-six named invertebrates incorporated in Nage metaphors, just 28 percent (or thirteen) are binomials (e.g., kaka koda, praying mantis) whereas of the grand total of 113 the proportion of binomially named folk-generics is over 43 percent (forty-nine). In this respect invertebrates most closely compare with reptiles, fish, and amphibians (chapter 6) for which the corresponding figures are just over thirty and nearly 53 percent. (By contrast, the figures for birds are forty and 47 percent.) Among invertebrates, creatures employed most as metaphors are crustaceans, specifically crayfish (or prawns) and crabs. There are twelve crustacean metaphors divided among four named categories (kuza, moga, kojo, podhe). The next largest groups are ants and beetles (eight each), insect larvae (six), grasshoppers (five, or six including the cricket), and wasps (five). As the largest invertebrates known to Nage, the prominence of crustaceans is mostly attributable to their size and hence the relative ease with which their features and habits are observed. Nage also use crustaceans as food, but they consume many insects and insect larvae as well, so size may account for the greater incidence of crustacean metaphors more than does utilitarian value. The extent to which practical uses figure in the motivation of metaphors is discussed in the next chapter, with reference to animals of all kinds.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

309

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 310

8 The Differential Metaphorical Value of Different Animals

To paraphrase George Orwell, while all animals can serve as metaphors some are more metaphorical than others. As is clear from the previous five chapters, mammals predominate, occurring in over 42 percent (240) of the total 566 metaphors, followed by birds at over 31 percent (178), other vertebrates at just under 13 percent (73), and invertebrates at just over 13 percent (75). Comparable differences appear in the number of categories subsumed within each of the life forms that could in principle be used as metaphors in relation to how many are in fact so used. Counting all named categories – including folk-specifics (like ngo ngoe, a kind of wild cat; and “chicken monitor,” denoting a putative kind of monitor lizard) and life forms (“snake” and “fish”) as well as folk-generics (like “buffalo,” “porcupine,” “chicken,” “friarbird,” “python,” “pit viper,” “frog,” “grasshopper,” “bedbug,” and so on) – there are 318 animal categories that Nage could conceivably employ in conventional metaphors. However, the number actually employed is 140, or around 44 percent. The disparity is largely accounted for by invertebrates. Thus, while there are 177 invertebrate categories, and while these make up over half of the 318 animal categories, just 51, or less than a third of the total of 177, are used metaphorically. By contrast, the proportions for other kinds of animals are considerably higher. Of a total of 25 mammal categories, 68 percent (17 of 25) are used as metaphors.1 For birds the figure is also 68 percent (49 of 72), and for all other vertebrate animals 52 percent (23 of 44). The fact that, by this measure, birds should be metaphorically exploited to the same extent as mammals is not so remarkable when it is recalled that birds comprise a much larger number of named categories overall than do mammals (72 versus 25).

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 311

At the same time, individual mammal categories (e.g., “buffalo,” “dog,” “porcupine”) occur in a far larger number of individual metaphorical expressions than do categories of birds, many kinds of which figure as the vehicle of just one or two metaphors. In regard to the metaphorical value of different animals, therefore, one still sees progressive reduction as one, so to speak, moves down the evolutionary scale. Before discussing factors accounting for this difference, it is worth considering how such variation in Nage metaphor compares to what is found among anglophones. For this purpose, I use Palmatier’s dictionary of animal metaphors, in which he records 1,435 English usages that expressly include the name of an animal (e.g., “busy as a bee” but not “hive of activity”). Of these, 56 percent (807) denote mammals, both wild and domestic. Birds (under which I include bats, for the sake of comparison with Nage and also in accordance with an older English usage) then account for 22 percent (321); other vertebrate animals 9 percent (133); and invertebrates 12 percent (174). Obvious differences include the higher proportion of mammals among the English metaphors (56 rather than 42 percent), the lower proportion of birds (22 as opposed to 31 percent), and the lower figure for vertebrates other than birds or mammals (9 rather than 13 percent). On the other hand, it is noteworthy that mammals and birds added together amount to over 73 percent for Nage and 78 percent for English. Of course, the comparison might be questioned on several grounds, including the fact that the considerably larger English corpus draws partly on literary sources (including Shakespeare and the Bible) spanning different historical periods. In addition, Palmatier’s focus is American English and a number of British animal metaphors are absent (see 366n3). Nevertheless, the resemblance between English and Nage metaphors is quite remarkable. In the same connection it is also noteworthy how a recent study of animal categories applied metaphorically to human personality traits and employed by American university students similarly revealed mammals to outnumber birds, fish, and insects (Sommer and Sommer 2011). Why Mammals? In view of this predominance of mammals, several factors affecting the metaphorical value of different kinds of animals might suggest themselves. For the most part, these concern relations between animals and humans – and, more particularly, Nage humans.

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

311

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 312

As hinted above, the decreasing value as one moves from mammals to invertebrates points to a phylogenetic correspondence. This would suggest that animals most employed as conventional metaphors are those most morphologically and behaviourally similar to humans – in respect to locomotion; methods of mating, reproduction, suckling of young, and care of infants; body covering; normal habitat (land versus water or air); and perhaps even facial appearance or expression and non-linguistic vocalization. By these criteria, mammals are obviously more like humans (who of course are themselves mammals) than are non-mammals. But physical similarity cannot be the whole story, not least because the animal serving as the vehicle of most Nage metaphors, forty-four in all, is the chicken, and, as this indicates, familiarity and the closely linked factor of spatial proximity may be more important determinants of an animal’s metaphorical value than is phylogenetic relatedness. Indeed, half of the Nage mammal categories comprise domestic animals, thus creatures that, like chickens, occupy much the same spaces as humans or are otherwise regularly in contact with people. The importance of familiarity was mentioned with reference to wild birds in chapter 5, where it was shown that the absence of a number of kinds from the Nage corpus is largely explained by their comparative rarity. The point gains further support from a comparison of domestic and wild mammals. Despite the two groups incorporating a roughly equal number of named categories, wild mammals account for less than a third (78) of the total 240 mammal metaphors. Monkeys and murids (or rats and mice, dhéke) provide by far the largest number of wild mammal metaphors – 32 and 17, respectively. Yet the remaining 5 categories – deer (occurring in 8 expressions), porcupine (in 5), Giant rat (4), shrew (4), and civet (8) – account for a total of just 29 metaphors, and this is far fewer than the number of expressions employing the 5 “most metaphorical” birds – the chicken (occurring in 44 metaphors), friarbird (17), bat (10), quail (8), and Spotted dove (8). Also worth recalling are the 11 expressions incorporating “snake” (nipa), the 9 employing the Tokay gecko, and the 7 incorporating the monitor lizard. Among mammals, the large number of metaphors incorporating the monkey is hardly surprising in view of the familiarity of this animal (see chapter 4) and its close resemblance to humans. Nor is the frequency with which rats and mice are employed as metaphors. Nage encounter commensal rodents with great regularity, inside settlements and especially inside dwellings, as well as in or near granaries and cultivated fields. In fact, so familiar are mice

312

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 313

and rats that to call them “wild animals” seems almost counterintuitive. Rats and mice are instructive in another respect since, in regard to metaphorical prominence, their spatial proximity and familiarity arguably compensate for their small size. Hunn (1999) has discussed the role of physical size in an animal’s overall salience and hence its prominence in folk-taxonomy, and, the exception of mice and rats aside, the Nage evidence reveals a similar correspondence between greater size and prominence in metaphor. At the same time, the size of an animal closely coincides with its status as a mammal or non-mammal and a domestic or wild creature. Thus, with few exceptions, the largest animals known to Nage are domestic mammals, the majority of which are larger than wild mammals and also larger than birds and other non-mammalian vertebrates. (The only exceptions are pythons and currently extraterritorial crocodiles and, in comparison to house cats – the smallest domestic animals – perhaps herons and eagles.) Of course, these several criteria cannot account for all differences in metaphorical use among single animal categories. For example, why bat metaphors are relatively numerous remains a question, especially since bats are nocturnal, are therefore seen less often than many diurnal animals, and hold little value for Nage, utilitarian or otherwise. On the other hand, flying foxes, the largest of bats and the kind providing the most bat metaphors, can be quite large – about the size of Nage cats – with a wingspan of well over a metre. A similar question concerns the relatively small number of deer metaphors – eight in all and thus fewer than bat metaphors and far fewer than the seventeen metaphors incorporating the friarbird – especially given the size of deer, their relative familiarity, and their status as a prized game animal (Forth 2016, 105–10). At the same time, neither the use value of an animal nor its spiritual, ritual, or mythical significance play as much a part in its employment in conventional metaphors as might be expected – a matter I explore further below. Thus far I have not distinguished between animal metaphors referring to humans and metaphorical usages with other referents. So it should be noted that the prominence of mammals in Nage metaphors generally is replicated in the occurrence of names for mammals in metaphorical names for plants, other animals, spiritual beings, artefacts, natural phenomena, and parts of the day or annual cycle. Of these metaphorical names, 56 incorporate names for mammals (47 domestic and 9 wild); 43 include names for birds; and 7 employ names for other vertebrate animals (lizards, frogs, the crocodile, and

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

313

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 314

marine turtles). Invertebrate names occur in just four metaphorical names, all of these designating plants. With the exception of “snake” (nipa), all of the incorporated terms label folk-generics. Among mammals, “water buffalo” appears in by far the highest number of metaphorical names (18 of 56), while the next highest, “dog” and “pig,” each occur in 9. Among the 9 wild mammals, “rat, mouse” (dhéke) occurs in 4. Among the 43 metaphorical names incorporating terms for birds, “chicken” appears in 14 and “friarbird” in 4. In all, 17 bird categories are used in naming plants, animals, and other nonhuman entities, but most of these occur in just 1, 2, or 3 names. Discussing English animal names metaphorically incorporating terms for other animals (e.g., “mule deer,” “zebra finch”), Palmatier (1995, x) states that the number of metaphorical names is “much larger” among fish (e.g., “catfish,” “dog fish,” “tiger shark,” “sea raven,” and many others) than among other animals. Nage presents a different picture. Apart from the fact that more metaphorical names apply to plants than to animals (55 versus 24), of the 24 metaphorically named animals exactly one half (12) are invertebrates. Only two are fish (Nos. 386, 458). Another 3 are mammals (324, 325, 483), while birds and reptiles (snakes and lizards) are the referents of 4 each (110, 312, 380, 389, and 288, 289, 387, 431). Other patterns are discernible among these metaphorical names. To begin with, animal names included in names of other animals usually denote different life forms. The only exceptions are three birds (including a bat) named after other birds (Nos. 312, 380, 389) and the mock viper (431) named with reference to a real viper. As this should suggest, taxonomic relations play hardly any role in motivating such metaphors. Bird names are more prominent as components of names of other animals than are names of creatures belonging to any other life form. “Eagle” (kua) occurs in two mammal names (Nos. 324 and 325) that, together with a variety of pig named after a frog (pake, No. 483), are the only instances of mammals named after other animals. In other instances, animals are metaphorically named after animals that are larger than themselves, and often considerably larger. This is borne out not only by the numerous invertebrates named in this way but also by the greater occurrence of mammal names, ten in all, as components of the twelve invertebrate names. (The other two are names of birds.) In all instances in which quite different creatures are named after mammals, moreover, the latter are domestic mammals and never a wild animal. “Buffalo” thus occurs in the names of three invertebrates (e.g., cico bhada, designating

314

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 315

a kind of cricket, No. 21), “pig” in four, “cat” in two, and “dog” in one. Except for “mock viper” (No. 431), “gecko goby” (458), and “frog pig” (483), names of lizards, snakes, fish, and amphibians do not occur in metaphorical animal names, and with just one exception none designates a mammal or a bird. Mammal names are also more numerous in metaphorical names applied to plants. Among kinds of plants metaphorically named after animals, twenty-nine are designated with names of mammals, both domestic and wild (e.g., “monkey’s testicles,” denoting a kind of tree), while twenty-five incorporate non-mammals. Among the latter, birds are the vehicles for fifteen names, reptiles for six, and invertebrates for four. Including several currently wild kinds (deer, porcupines, monkeys) all mammals except for bats and several murid species were brought to Flores by humans, as were chickens and domestic ducks. However, other than the two metaphors employing cattle and the two employing ducks, both introduced during the colonial period, there is no correlation between the length of time that an animal has been on the island and the extent of its present metaphorical use – either in metaphorical naming or metaphors referring to humans. Mammals that have been longer on Flores, such as pigs, porcupines, and civets, not to mention the native Giant rat, inform fewer metaphorical names than do more recent introductions, such as water buffalo, horses, cats, and perhaps goats (but see Forth 2016, 85). Clearly, then, more important in this connection are factors such as size, familiarity, and resemblance to humans. Varieties of Motivation Like differences revealed in the metaphorical use of animals of different kinds, other conclusions that can be drawn from the Nage corpus also have a more general relevance for the understanding of conventional metaphor. First, it is abundantly clear that a single animal can provide the vehicle for quite different metaphors with different referents, applying for the most part to very different human attributes or behaviours, both positive and negative. To recall just one example, reflecting different habits of the bird, the Channel-billed cuckoo can represent either a scrounger (No. 255) or a valued messenger (257). In other words, when used as metaphors, animal categories are polysemic, capable of conveying a variety of different meanings. Clearly then, it is not the category, or the whole animal considered as a gestalt, that conveys meaning but selected features of an animal – and in

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

315

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 316

the majority of cases just one or a few, so that in any single metaphor many attributes of an animal play no motivational role, even though these may be equally known to language users. To be sure, two or more metaphors sometimes draw on the same feature of the same animals – the belly of the Giant rat (Nos. 177–9), the tail of the drongo (Nos. 316, 317), and the bill of the kingfisher (Nos. 374, 375) – but this is less usual. In the same vein, named or unnamed higher order folk taxa – most notably the “folk-intermediates” evident mostly in the classification of birds (e.g., diurnal birds of prey, pigeons, and doves, the several named kinds of bats; see Forth 2016, 166–71) – reveal little coincidence with single metaphorical themes or clusters of metaphors displaying similar meanings. The only possible exceptions concern three birds of prey whose names refer metaphorically to mourners or, in one case, to the soul of a dead person (Nos. 321, 355, 377), and three metaphors employing doves or pigeons, all of which allude to human sexual or romantic attraction (Nos. 352, 353, 404). Employing birds subsumed in an intermediate taxon of “crows and crowlike birds,” metaphors incorporating the two large cuckoos (muta me and toe ou the Channel-billed cuckoo and the koel) – both parasites of crows – are identically motivated by the useful character of their calls as chronological signs (Nos. 256–9 and Nos. 382–3). Yet other birds belonging to this category – such as actual crows – have no such significance, and, in general, semantic differences among Nage animal metaphors reveal no comprehensive or systematic connection with Nage folk zoological taxonomy. This point was made previously in regard to taxonomy and symbolic uses of animals generally (Forth 2016, e.g., 272–5). Yet Nage metaphors illuminate a further difference between taxonomic treatment of animals and their metaphorical use. Whereas a taxonomy necessarily builds on general knowledge of the form and habits of different creatures, in several instances Nage are mostly unfamiliar with an animal vehicle, knowing just enough about the creature to employ the metaphor consistently and maintain an interpretation. Examples include metaphors incorporating the deer name lota (Nos. 167–8), the dolphin (463), and crustacean larvae (560). Although less pronounced than the linked properties of polysemy and selectivity, another common quality of Nage animal metaphors is synonymity – the use of very different animals to convey the same or very similar meanings. A number of instances are set out in table 2. To these might be added the numerous metaphors referring to boisterous, misbehaving children or

316

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 317

infants crying. This is not to claim that all metaphors in table 2 possess completely identical meanings. For example, “having a neck like a banana beetle” (No. 523) describes someone who is too inclined to give into requests, whereas “horse with a flexible neck” (No. 47) alludes to a more general, and somewhat more positive, attitude of compliance. Also, a good number of metaphors have meanings additional to the one synonymous with the meaning of another metaphor. Nevertheless, the various comparisons clearly show how features (and, in most instances, specifically behaviours) of very different animals can serve similar, and sometimes very similar, metaphorical ends. From the foregoing examples it should be evident how synonymy connects with the typically selective character of the metaphors – the way they focus on a single behavioural or morphological attribute that is comparable in two otherwise different animals. In other instances, this same meaning is conveyed by different single features of different animals – for example, “squeezed frog,” “gecko’s eggs,” and “eyeballs of a snail,” all describing a person with bulging eyes (see table 2). In a couple of cases synonymous or semantically similar metaphors involve phylogenetically similar animals displaying more or less identical behaviours – for instance, the squirming movements of two sorts of insect larvae (maggots and wrigglers) or flies swarming around sores and grasshoppers swarming around dog faeces (see table 2). But this does not compromise the fact that it is specific single attributes of the animals concerned that define the particular vehicles of two or more semantically similar metaphors. And as has already been demonstrated, comparable usages mostly involve very dissimilar animals, including mammals and birds, reptiles and mammals, mammals and invertebrates, and so on. Interestingly, particular physical similarities between animals belonging to different life forms also inform more or less speculative ideas Nage maintain concerning permanent transformations of one kind of animal into another – for example, bats into civets (Forth 2016, 276–94). For the present, however, I would just note that none of these transformations has motivated any animal metaphor. Given that selectivity and specificity are basic to both the polysemy of individual animal metaphors and the synonymity of a good number, a question arises as to the nature of the specific qualities selected. From discussion of individual metaphors it is abundantly clear that a large majority are motivated by empirical attributes of the animals concerned – that is, by specific elements of their physical form or behaviour. Since for the very most part

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

317

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 318

Table 2 Examples of synonymity in animal metaphors Metaphors

Common referent

Buffalo that wrecks its enclosure (13),

People who cause trouble within

cat biting its own tail (145), rat inside

their own group

a bamboo rafter (186) Horse with a soft neck (47), dog that is

A compliant person

tame with everyone (98), banana beetle (523) Pregnant mare (53), Giant rat (177, 178,

Person with a large or

179), bullfrog (474, 475)

distended belly

Horse that dances to the drum (41),

Someone who is too “quick off the

horse with its bridle removed (48),

mark,” especially when food is

bronzeback whose tail alone remains

being served

(436) Ram’s horn (62), cat’s tail (144)

A dishonest or devious person

Goat droppings (70), scattered like

A group that is disunited

civets (205), dispersed like monkeys (209) Goat on the mountain side (75),

Something that distracts a person’s

rat above (185)

attention

Dog waiting for bones (100), monkey

Person who declines to act or does

sitting halfway up a tree (227), dove

not act immediately

looking at a pool of water (401) Dog pissing at the edge of a path (93), fly alighting on sores (516)

Someone who acts inconsistently or inconstantly, e.g., quickly changing tasks

Child of a wild pig (120), child of a skink (448)

An illegitimate child

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 319

Metaphors

Common referent

Civet in a dead Arenga palm (202),

Someone who rarely leaves home

rat inside a bamboo rafter (186), grub

or mixes with others

sniffing its own arse (543) Rat without an escape hole (189),

A person who gets into a situation

earthworm unable to reenter the

from which he cannot extricate

earth (561)

himself

Mouth like a shrew (198), mouth like

Someone who talks constantly

a chicken’s anus (277) Dove looking at a pool of water (401),

Someone present at an undertaking

cockroach on the edge of a plate (532)

but who does not participate

Monitor lizard collecting black ants

A lazy person who waits to be fed

(441), tadpole feeding on dirt (484), praying mantis on top of a cotton blossom (498) Monitor’s penis (445), crocodile down

A man who engages in

by the coast (486)

indiscriminate sex

Biting like a Tokay gecko (451),

A stingy person

small wasp (501) Grasshoppers around dog faeces (492),

People immediately drawn to

flies round a sore (518)

something

Squeezed frog (476), gecko’s eggs (452), A person with bulging eyes eyeballs like a snail (565) Crawling bedbug (538), moving like

A person who moves very slowly

a slug (566) Maggot (541), mosquito larva (545)

A person who cannot keep still

Termite (535), grub (544)

A person with unseen negative qualities, who does undetected harm

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 320

these are attributes Nage themselves identify, these motivations, or the local interpretations of which they form part, might be called “cultural.” But this applies only in the most general or minimal sense of the term, and since a large majority of Nage metaphors appear to be zoologically well-founded – which is to say, in accord with what anyone with knowledge of the animals, regardless of cultural background, would agree are accurate attributes of the creatures in question – the same number would be quite readily intelligible without any detailed or comprehensive knowledge of Nage culture or society. To be clear, this is not to claim that interpretations or usual referents of a metaphor will be completely obvious simply from familiarity with an animal, even to Nage, since these must be learned in the same way as any conventional usage – as anglophones will know from first encountering certain English metaphors. Rather, the point is that the motivation of most Nage animal metaphors would be readily comprehensible to an outsider from familiarity with the creature’s empirical attributes (e.g., the urinational habit of dogs) and components of the referent to which these correspond (inconstant human activity). In contrast, a minority of animal metaphors – fewer than 20 percent (110 of the total 566) – are motivated by culturally specific ideas and practices pertaining to an animal, and although these are themselves commonly, and often obviously, grounded in the animal’s empirical attributes (the defecatory habits of flying foxes, No. 241; the lines on a skink, No. 448), knowledge of culturally particular beliefs, activities, and institutions is crucial to understanding the metaphor. Equally based in experience are the calls of birds employed as chronological signs, a kind of value that, moreover, is recognized the world over. All the same, these calls are culturally specific insofar as Nage make use of vocalizations of specific birds in the organization of specific, especially agricultural, activities; and notwithstanding their partly empirical character I further describe such motivations, like other culturally specific practices and ideas, as “non-empirical” in reference to this culturally contingent aspect. In the Nage case, the largest number of culturally specific motivations can further be specified as “utilitarian” since they concern, for example, the use of animals as bridewealth, methods of caring for animals (tethering or enclosing them), and hunting and agricultural practices. Some reflect even more particular practices involving animals, such as the customary method of slaughtering pigs (No. 127) or the children’s use of rhinoceros beetles as playthings (No. 526). On the other hand, many practical uses of

320

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 321

animals find no expression in metaphors – for example, the use of shellfish to produce lime, net-weights, and ornaments; the use of tail feathers of domestic cocks and the bright yellow plumage of the oriole as ceremonial decoration (specifically for men’s headdresses, spears, and other weapons); or keeping monkeys and less commonly civets and wild birds as pets. Of course, most animals have some use for Nage, if only because they consume almost all mammals as well as many birds, fish, frogs, two kinds of lizards, and not a few varieties of invertebrates (Forth 2016, 237–9). So I should stress that, here, I refer to specific practical uses they make of animals and how, in some instances, these uses are essential to a metaphor’s motivation. At the same time, I also count metaphors motivated by negative values of animals, specifically the many creatures that do damage to crops (or, in the case of raptorial birds, prey on chickens, or steal juice as it is collected from palms in the case of friarbirds and sunbirds) or, like poisonous snakes and biting insects, cause personal harm or annoyance. (I do so advisedly, however, since many of these values are quite directly inferable from empirical observation or experience of the creatures concerned.) Besides utilitarian values, other culturally particular factors motivating the appearance of animals in a small number of metaphors – just eight or less than 2 percent of the total of 566, and less than a quarter of all “culturally” motivated metaphors – can be called symbolic. Anthropologists commonly use “symbolic,” a useful odd-job word, to distinguish properties or associations of things that, although often traceable to empirical qualities of the thing in question, are themselves non-empirical in that observation does not confirm them and may even contradict them. Among symbolic properties informing Nage animal metaphors are the appearance of the animal in cosmological beliefs (e.g., the dung-beetle’s role in earthquakes, No. 520), in magic and taboo (e.g., “ascending snakes,” No. 427; and the witu tui bird, No. 415), and in folktales and myths (e.g., the origin of the whistler, No. 418).2 As instances of “symbolic” motivation I also include metaphorical names of spirits and similarly supernatural or mysterious entities in which the names of animals appear (e.g., “speckled fowl,” No. 297). Other motivating ideas are not symbolic in any of the foregoing respects but are no less non-empirical, especially as they are not borne out by experience of animals – as Nage themselves sometimes recognize. These ideas can also be called “symbolic” in a cognitive sense, where the term distinguishes representations that require a special kind of cognitive processing in order

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

321

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 322

to survive in the absence of any firm empirical foundation (e.g., Sperber 1975; Boyer 1994). Although sometimes received sceptically by Nage, such representations are not themselves metaphors and, as discussed in chapter 2, can only be called “beliefs.” A good example concerns the skink, a small lizard that is widely described as being able to impregnate female pigs (Forth 2016, 298–300). Many Nage doubt that this is true, yet with reference to the proposition they apply the metaphor “child of a skink” (No. 448) to a person whose biological father is unknown or undisclosed. Although apparently disputed less often, another instance of such ideas motivating a metaphor is the notion that earthworms, after emerging from the earth, are unable ever to re-enter (No. 561). Besides the metaphor, this notion also informs a magical procedure used to counter witchcraft. But by all indications, the procedure is simply a further effect of the non-empirical idea and is neither the source nor product of the metaphor. In fact, it is more likely in this case that an unfounded idea concerning an animal’s behaviour has its main source in the conventional metaphor (Forth 2016, 259–60), a possibility further suggested by the metaphor describing male rats as having only one testicle (No. 180). A connection between magic and metaphor is further revealed in the practice of tying a piece of the desiccated tail of a bronzeback snake to the tail of a horse to increase the horse’s speed (202). But rather than this practice inspiring a comparable metaphor (No. 434), both the metaphor and the magic obviously reflect the empirically well-founded status of the bronzeback as the fastest of snakes. Additional examples of non-empirical ideas motivating animal metaphors include the notion that flying foxes lack an anus (No. 241) and the claim that the Island pipe snake, or “two-headed snake” (No. 426), actually has two heads. In none of the foregoing instances is the animal identified with any sort of spirit. But in this respect they are little different from other symbolically motivated metaphors for in hardly any case does the identification of an animal with a spiritual being play a decisive part in motivating a conventional animal metaphor. As demonstrated elsewhere (Forth 1998, 2016), among the most prominent forms of Nage animal symbolism is a series of beliefs linking specific animals with spiritual beings – including free spirits (i.e., forest, water, or mountain spirits, all designated as nitu), spirits of the dead, and human souls. Free spirits, Nage say, will occasionally, incidentally, and situationally assume the form of a snake or eel, or less often a fish, crustacean, or bird – thus all non-mammals. At the same time, Nage describe wild mam-

322

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 323

mals as the domestic animals of these spirits, a conception they extend to one wild bird, the junglefowl (kata), identified as the spirits’ chickens. Further beliefs linking animals with spirits include the idea that a Brahminy kite, a bird of prey, can manifest malevolent mountain spirits out looking for human victims; a contextual identification of certain smaller birds and some invertebrates with souls of dead or living humans; and the belief that both owls and diurnal birds of prey manifest the spiritual aspect of human witches. But not a single one of these ideas plays any significant part in conventional animal metaphors. This brief digression into Nage spiritual cosmology serves to make a major point, for the virtual absence of beliefs connecting animals and spirits in the motivations of Nage animal metaphors is a signal finding of the present study. Probably the clearest proof is the fact that none of the twenty-two snake metaphors is connected with the status of snakes as the life form Nage mostly identify with free spirits. Nor are any metaphors employing eels or fish – other possible manifestations of these spirits – or any of the numerous metaphors incorporating wild mammals (the spirits’ livestock). In fact, the python, the snake Nage most often identify as a situational manifestation of a free spirit, provides the vehicle of just a single metaphor, and this focuses not on any spiritual association but solely on the snake’s well-attested swallowing ability. The same disconnection was previously remarked in reference to the Nage belief that human beings exist simultaneously as water buffalo belonging to mountain spirits (chapter 2). This notion leaves no impression in any of their thirty-three buffalo metaphors, even though according to some commentators one of these (No. 2) links the extraordinary powers of “transforming buffalo” (a metaphor for human duplicity) to a special spiritual entity, a type of “soul,” possessed exclusively by certain buffalo bulls selected for sacrifice. The metaphorical naming of a dead person’s soul, or indeed corpse, as an “earth buffalo” (No. 31) does indeed reflect spiritual ideas, as does the single metaphor employing the cuckoo-shrike, a bird Nage contextually regard as a dead human soul come to summon another to death. But this does not apply to three other bird metaphors – those employing the kite (No. 377), pigeon (No. 391), and the unspecific “sea fowl” (No. 280) – since their interpretation as references to human souls is exclusive to these particular metaphors. It also seems significant that all three occur in songs of mourning (as in fact does the cuckoo-shrike metaphor) and that in two the bird is alternatively identifiable with living mourners. But a more important point is that none of these four

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

323

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 324

bird metaphors, nor the two buffalo metaphors, implicates Nage ideas about free spirits (the beings generally known as nitu). Contrariwise, many birds that Nage do identify with spirits either do not occur as metaphorical vehicles or, where they do, are evidently not selected for their spiritual associations. Examples of the latter are the Large-billed crow, owl, and drongo – all three classified by Nage as “witch birds.” Similarly, neither of the two metaphors employing the stubtail draws on this bird’s status as an omen, and while Nage identify the whistler with souls of deceased infants, this association is evidently secondary to the myth that also motivates the metaphor (Forth 2004a, 87–8). Absent altogether from the Nage corpus are the Flores crow (another witch bird), a bird named koa ka (possibly another name for the koel, Nos. 382, 383), the deza kela (a small bird whose poignant song is thought to manifest a distressed soul), and the nightjar, a bird that, although not associated with any sort of spirit, is a bad omen for nocturnal hunters (Forth 2004a, 100–1, and see pp.17–23 for ornithological identifications of all these birds). In the same way, butterflies and spiders are not employed in any metaphors, although Nage contextually identify both as visible forms assumed by spiritual beings, including human souls. As for snakes, the only metaphor motivated by a non-empirical idea of any sort is “ascending snakes” (No. 427), which, as a reference to driftwood, reflects the magical (and therefore non-spiritual) belief that burning such wood can cause snakes to enter the house. As noted, less than a fifth of Nage animal metaphors are motivated by culturally specific uses of any sort. Details are provided in table 3, in which distinctions are further registered between different animal life forms, between utilitarian and symbolic values, and also between different sorts of utilitarian or symbolic value. Distinguishing the use of animals in exchange between affines is informative because the prescribed use of different animals as bridewealth or counter-gift can partly be viewed as symbolic, as in one sense can the value of bird vocalizations as chronological signs. Also, negative utilitarian values of animals, composing by far the commonest sort of utilitarian value, are usefully distinguished from positive values. And on the “symbolic” side, metaphorical names for spirits of otherwise non-empirical beings need to be separated from metaphors crucially informed by the part played by animals in Nage cosmology, magic, and myth. Table 3 shows how utilitarian value far outweighs symbolic value in the motivation of Nage animal metaphors. Yet a more important finding is that over

324

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 325

Table 3 Cultural factors motivating animal metaphors Mammals (in

Birds

Snakes

parentheses:

and other

domestic/wild)

vertebrates

Invertebrates

Totals

UTILITARIAN Bridewealth,

(8/0)

3

0

0

11

15

0

0

15

1

4

3

22

11

1

16

34

28

30

5

19

82

Cosmological,

5

7

1

3

15

mythical, magical

(2/3) 1

3

0

0

4

3

2

2

1

8

12

3

4

27

affinal exchange Chronological signs (Other) positive

0 14

Utilitarian value

(14/0)

Negative utilitarian

6

value

(1/5)

Total utilitarian SYMBOLIC

significance Supernatural beings or mystical entities named after animals Other non-empirical

(0/3) Total symbolic Total cultural Total metaphors

9 37 240 (162/78)

42

8

23

110

178

73

75

566

four-fifths of the metaphors are quite straightforwardly motivated by empirical factors and thus unaffected by specific cultural considerations of any kind, utilitarian or otherwise. According to a received view in anthropology, the practical value of animals and plants is the main driver in the construction of folk taxonomies. In my previous book (Forth 2016) I explain why I find this view erroneous and how it is contradicted by the Nage evidence. Applying

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

325

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 326

equally to symbolic values of animals, obviously the critique can now be extended from taxonomy to conventional metaphor. Table 3 also facilitates generalizations concerning different animal life forms. The largest number of metaphors reflecting cultural values have birds as their vehicles (over 38 percent), closely followed by mammals (34 percent). All metaphors relating to chronological signs involve birds and specifically their vocalizations. Occurring more often in metaphors contained in the lyrics of song and other poetic genres than do other animals, birds are also prominent in other metaphors reflecting symbolic values, and this too is largely attributable to values Nage attach to bird vocalizations. Invertebrates occur in a surprisingly large proportion of culturally motivated metaphors, making up 21 percent of the total. In addition, such metaphors compose over 30 percent of all invertebrate metaphors. But both figures are mostly accounted for by the negative utilitarian value of biting, pestilential, or otherwise bothersome insects; and symbolic representations of invertebrates, by contrast, have a far smaller influence. For obvious reasons, domestic mammals are the commonest vehicles of metaphors shaped by practices involving exchange between affines. On the other hand, while domesticates are the most economically valuable of animals, and furthermore provide vehicles for a very large number of metaphors generally (208, combining the totals for mammals, chickens, and domestic ducks), specific uses of domestic animals play a relatively minor part in metaphorical motivation. Accordingly, utilitarian value fails to explain why metaphors incorporating no less valuable horses and pigs are low in comparison to those employing buffalo, dogs, and chickens. And the point applies equally to wild animals, among which deer, valued with wild pigs as the most important type of game, occur as the vehicle of no more metaphors than do civets. Animal Names and Metaphor Usually combining with empirical attributes, other non-empirical factors affecting the metaphorical deployment of specific animals in conventional metaphors are aspects of an animal’s name. As discussed in previous chapters, monomials – names comprising a single lexeme (or “word”) – appear to be preferred over binomials. Monomial naming might thus be counted as another reason for the greater metaphorical employment of mammals, almost all of which are named monomially, especially as regards folk-generics (like

326

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 327

“buffalo,” “dog,” “deer,” “rat or mouse,” “civet,” and so on). Folk-specifics, on the other hand, are typically named with binomials – like wawi witu (“forest pig”), which names wild as opposed to domestic pigs. But among mammals folk-specifics are far fewer than among other life forms, and besides wawi witu the only mammal folk-specific used metaphorically is ngo ngoe, denoting what is considered a particular kind of wild cat. Quite another matter is why some animals are named monomially in the first place. Universally, monomial names are applied far more often to folk-generics than to folk-specifics or other folk biological categories (Berlin 1992), and among Nage such names are most commonly applied to mammal generics – and then, as shown just above, more consistently to domestic than to wild animals. As suggested by Berlin, these differences are likely bound up with how frequently people talk about particular animals, a variable connected not only with different practical uses made of animals but also with a variety of other values, arguably including how often an animal category is employed in conventional metaphor. A question thus arises as to the extent to which metaphorical uses of animals may contribute to the development of monomial names, but this is a topic I am unable to treat properly here. Another factor influencing the metaphorical use of particular animals is prosodic effects of animal names – the fit between the name and other elements (verbs, adjectives) of a conventional expression effected by rhyme, assonance, or alliteration. Only occasionally do Nage themselves mention the character of a name when discussing possible motivations of an animal metaphor (see No. 532). Even so, prosody is discernible in a variety of expressions and moreover occurs not just in metaphors employed in song or parallel speech but equally in metaphors heard in ordinary conversation. In many instances, prosody appears to have been more influential in the selection of other elements of an expression rather than in the selection of the animal name, especially where a metaphor appears sufficiently accounted for by empirical features of the animal or by its cultural value. The distinction is often difficult to make out, and since Nage lexemes comprise either monosyllabic or bisyllabic words, lack terminal consonants, and contain a limited number of vowels and vowel combinations, it is not always clear whether prosodic effects are influential or incidental, especially in regard to assonance. Nevertheless, around 10 percent of animal metaphors (fifty-seven of the total of 566) suggest some prosodic effects in their overall composition.3 Of these, the prosodic quality of an animal’s name appears to be a substantial factor

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

327

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 328

motivating its occurrence in about twenty expressions, though rarely it seems the sole factor. Instances include: meo déto (No. 156); ‘udu kutu (No. 171); pe’u bétu (No. 176); base … dhéke hase (No. 180); dhéke néke bétu (No. 182); ‘o’a sawi wawi (No. 225); ‘o’a to, gala bha (No. 235); ana go dhego go (No. 254); céce … ne’e, koka … mona (No. 318); bio bido (No. 326); ceka leza (No. 333); leo be’o (No. 339); bopo … tolo … mogo (No. 353); sizo io … nio (No. 355); héke muke (No. 356); lala … kata mala (No. 369); iki puki teka (No. 372); pake ne’e ate, kuza ne’e tuka (No. 481); eo ne tépo (No. 515); and ngoi ngata (552). Although less common, yet another linguistic factor evidently shaping some animal metaphors concerns what I have previously called binary composites (Forth 2016, 140–8) – standard expressions in which the names of two animals are regularly combined. One example is kutu bétu, “porcupine [and] Giant rat” (Nos. 171 and 176). Binary composites usually comprise animals that are physically similar, so their composition has a definite empirical basis. Nevertheless, such composites almost never name taxonomic categories – for example, higher order folk taxa (life forms or folk-intermediates) that systematically subsume folk-generics. Moreover, a single category can appear in more than one composite – a possibility illustrated by “goat,” which is contextually paired with three other animals. Accordingly, binary composites are typically used as components of non-taxonomic, special-purpose classifications – for example, when speaking about game animals, animals required as bridewealth, and so on. Besides the metaphorical pairing of “porcupine” and “Giant rat,” the influence of binary composites is evident in expressions incorporating “buffalo” and “horse” (Nos. 8, 37); “sheep” and “goat” (Nos. 65, 73); “goat” and “pig” (Nos. 71, 129); “goat” and “dog” (Nos. 74, 92); “dog” and “pig” (Nos. 86, 121); “deer” and “(wild) pig” (Nos. 130, 163); “Fruit dove” and “Imperial pigeon” (Nos. 353, 362); and “quail” and “Spotted dove” (Nos. 393, 405, 402, 405). Some of these usages, it should be noted, also reveal prosodic effects, for example, ‘usa ‘Ua (“goat of ‘Ua,” No. 73) and lebu Kebi (“sheep of Kebi,” No. 65), two phrases sometimes uttered in combination. And for this reason, and because of the influence of physical and behavioural factors, either in the formation of binary composites or in the motivation of animal metaphors generally, it would be misleading to count conventional metaphors reflecting composites as additional instances of metaphors motivated by cultural, linguistic, or broadly “non-empirical” values. Also requiring mention are the incidence of metaphors pairing animal categories that are not combined in standard binary composites and, con-

328

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 329

versely, how not all composites are reflected in conventional metaphors. For example, the composite ‘o’a ghoa, “monkey [and] monitor lizard” – one of two combining a mammal and a non-mammal (Forth 2016, 144; the other is “quail [and] rat,” piko dhéke) – is not attested in any metaphor, while, on the other hand, several metaphors connect “monkey,” parallelistically, with “porcupine” (No. 173), “civet” (No. 205), “cockatoo” (No. 309), “fish fry” (Nos. 233, 470), and a snake (the bronzeback, No. 235). In comparison to mammals and birds, reptiles and other non-mammals are included in fewer binary composites, a circumstance that would explain why no metaphors reflect standard pairings of animals of these kinds. Several composites combine invertebrate categories, and Nage employ three of these as conventional metaphors (metu mule, No. 508; emu hale, No. 519; and maju mela, Nos. 536, 537), doing so moreover without separating the components with verbs or modifiers as is usually done in metaphorical applications of mammal and bird composites. Finally, three metaphors, all employing birds, are partly motivated by the homonymy of the birds’ names and phenomena alluded to in their respective interpretations – specifically, ana go (No. 254), manu miu (No. 283), and kuku raku (No. 417). Although not reproduced in any metaphor, another possible example is the full name of the bushchat, tute péla, specifically the second component of the name in regard to the referent of one metaphor that employs this bird (identified simply as tute, No. 251). However, whether dealing with homonymy, monomial naming, prosody, or binary composites, linguistic effects, wherever they are evident in Nage animal metaphors, are virtually always found in conjunction with other motivational factors – either empirical features or cultural associations of the animal vehicle – and, as the interpretations of Nage commentators would suggest, are influenced far more by these than by properties of the animal’s name. Prosody especially should be considered as a factor contributing to the memorability of metaphorical expressions, yet it is clearly not the only factor hypothetically contributing to the survival of conventional expressions. Generalizations and Further Interpretations Several general features of Nage animal metaphors are now well established. Among these is a use of specific attributes of animal kinds to make statements about equally specific features of other things – most notably, of course, human beings. In addition, in the majority of cases these attributes

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

329

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 330

are empirical, comprising particular morphological or behavioural features that, I would stress, are typically available to a panhuman observation of the creatures in question. The remainder are then motivated by non-empirical, culturally specific attributes of animals, relating either to practical uses of specific animals or ideas about animals reflecting specific cosmological or other values of the sort that have generally been called symbolic. A review of motivational factors has also revealed a general incompatibility or inconsistency between, on the one hand, the use of animals in conventional metaphors and, on the other, cultural values attributed to the same animals, especially in Nage spiritual cosmology. Partly illuminating this phenomenon is the specific and selective character not only of metaphorical value but also both cosmological and utilitarian values of animals – that is, the fact that all these values reflect a limited number of an animal’s features, and often just one (e.g., the shape of its tail, colour of its pelage or plumage, its nocturnal habit, the significance of its calls, or the practical use made of some part of an animal). In this respect, the relative absence of cultural values reflected in the motivation of animal metaphors might be attributed to a tendency to select different features of the same animal when it is used to construct a metaphor and when it serves other cultural purposes. But there is evidently more to the matter than this, and to reach a fuller solution we need to treat symbolic and utilitarian uses of animals separately. The first thing to recall is that the number of metaphors reflecting utilitarian values is far higher than those reflecting an animal’s symbolic significance – in Nage cosmology, mythology, and the like. As regards utilitarian values, differential selectivity of particular traits does indeed go some way to explaining the relative absence of such values as motivation for conventional metaphors. And this is largely because the practical uses to which particular animals are put – for example, as raw materials or items of exchange – are limited and are far exceeded by numerous other features available for use as vehicles of conventional metaphor. Here it should also be recalled that, of the several varieties of utilitarian significance distinguished in table 3, it is an animal’s negative value that informs the greatest number of metaphors, over 40 percent (thirty-four of eighty-two). Symbolic uses of animals, by contrast, are subject to rather fewer restrictions, but there are other differences as well. As demonstrated, beliefs linking animals with spirits are virtually absent from the motivation of Nage animal metaphors. To be sure, animal categories occur in a small number

330

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 331

of metaphorical names denoting spiritual beings, among which might be counted “earth buffalo,” denoting the soul or corpse of a dead person. But in these cases, a spirit (or something else neither clearly human nor animal, like the “miu fowl,” No. 296, and “highland quail,” No. 397, both manifest only as mysterious sounds) is of course the referent of the expression rather than a factor in the motivation of the metaphor, applying to a human or anything else. As for other symbolically motivated metaphors, the value of the animal reflects its significance in Nage myth, magic, or taboo, where the creature in question has no association with spirits. In view of the prominence of animals both in Nage representations of spiritual beings and in their conventional metaphors, the fact that spiritual associations of animals play virtually no part in motivating the metaphors may appear puzzling. The circumstance might seem all the more curious when it comes to animals, such as snakes, that Nage describe as phenomenally manifesting otherwise anthropomorphous spirits. Yet a solution can be found in cognitive differences between two sorts of representations, particularly those discussed in chapter 2 distinguishing metaphor from belief. For example, a person working inconstantly leads Nage to think of a urinating dog, and does so by virtue of the conventional metaphor – a standard representation. The metaphor might also cause people observing a urinating dog to think about people they know. But in either case, the similarity is recognized simply as a resemblance, so that speaking of someone as a urinating dog is understood as a figurative statement, a conscious and deliberate, though socially and discursively useful, fiction. By contrast, someone observing a Brahminy kite flying unusually high and circling without descending may well interpret this phenomenon, in accordance with a general belief, as a malevolent mountain spirit in search of a human victim (Forth 1998, 151–2; see also No. 377), just as an owl calling unusually close to a dwelling, especially one containing someone who is seriously ill, is likely to be interpreted as signalling an imminent death (Forth 2004a, 69). Or to take another case, a person coming across an unusually large or odd-coloured eel will be inclined to see this as a manifestation of a water spirit, the leader of a group of such spirits or the spiritual “guardian” of the water, which he or she will therefore avoid harming or disturbing (Forth 2016, 218). As is clear from previous chapters, the place of eels and owls in conventional metaphor is insignificant, and while metaphors involving kites are somewhat more numerous, none definitely reflects the possible spiritual significance of

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

331

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 332

these birds. But the more general point is that Nage encountering the same creatures will recognize, if only as a potentiality, real connections between the animal and a spirit, so for Nage these ideas are anything but metaphoric, figuring instead as beliefs informing, if only situationally, people’s relations with the animals, including the observance of taboos and ritual practices intended to counteract negative consequences of encounters. It therefore follows that hypothetical expressions like “high-flying kite” or “hooting owl nearby” would not be suitable as conventional metaphors, especially if applied to a person in direct address, because the spiritual associations of the images they convey would obviously compromise any metaphorical intent. If conveying any meaning at all, the statements would very likely be taken literally – as implying either that the person was a spirit (which for Nage would actually convey no definite significance) or that he or she was a witch, an inference that could have serious social consequences.4 The place of animal metaphors in social relations is discussed in the next chapter. For the present another, possibly related, difference deserves attention. In metaphors, mammals and especially domestic mammals predominate, while in (non-metaphorical) spiritual representations mammals are in fact underrepresented, and accordingly, snakes, birds, other non-mammalian vertebrates, and even invertebrates are more prominent. Spiritual representations incorporating mammals are in fact confined to a view of wild mammals as spirits’ livestock and the belief that the spirit of a witch can assume the form of a rat or mouse. (Buffalo are associated with spirits only to the extent that humans are thought to exist as spirit buffalo and, according to a piece of specialist knowledge, sacrificial buffalo are as it were contextual embodiments of buffalo-owing spirits.) In part, this contrast of life forms is consistent with a view of spirits generally, and especially free spirits and witches, as having no proper place inside human settlements, which for a large part is where domestic animals also reside. But the zoological opposition further reflects a cosmological principle whereby spirits, both free spirits and human souls, are conceived as unseen but essentially human-like beings that very occasionally become visible or otherwise phenomenally manifest only in the form of creatures that are most dissimilar to humans. As demonstrated, the predominance of mammals in conventional metaphors, on the other hand, largely corresponds to their greater physical similarity to humans. In addition, the contrast with spirits and their incidental manifestations as very non-human animals arguably accords with a Nage view of spirits of all kinds as fundamentally in-

332

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 333

verted beings (see note 4), a point documented at length in other writings (Forth 1998; Forth 2016). Why Animals? While it is sufficiently clear why mammals should predominate in Nage metaphor, yet to be addressed is the larger question of why animals at all and, more specifically, why animals should occupy such a premier place as vehicles of conventional metaphors not just among Nage but the world over. Properties that make mammals better suited for metaphorical deployment than other animals – especially the many ways mammals palpably resemble humans in regard to morphology, methods of mating and reproduction, and so on – have some bearing on the metaphorical value of animals in general. But there is rather more to say, and a place to begin is differences between animals, on the one hand, and non-animals – plants, inanimate objects, artefacts – on the other. Unlike the latter, animals are by definition animated and, like humans, are capable of self-directed movement – regardless of how they differ from humans in their locomotory abilities. Also like humans, animals eat and defecate, and most species produce sounds. Of course, movement and sound are also properties of some inanimate things, like flowing water, wind, and fire. But owing to their existence as discrete individuals as well as the importance of movement for their survival, animals not only move but also engage in a variety of acts, activities, and behaviours, many of which evince specific aims and suggest definite purposes. What is more, animal actions have immediately observable effects on other things, including other animals, vegetation and inorganic components of the natural environment, and human artefacts (buildings, enclosures, and the like). Without suggesting that non-human animals are completely identical to humans in these respects, it is therefore no coincidence that the majority of animal metaphors – in Nage, English, and other languages – refer to humans acting or behaving in specific ways or displaying particular characters. And it is equally clear how plants, for example, do not serve nearly so well, even though by virtue of their ability to reproduce, grow and spread, and wither and die, and because of their visual and olfactory qualities, plants too can refer metaphorically to humans. In addition to bodily features linking animals and humans, it is to a large degree the distinctive ways in which different animals not only move but also

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

333

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 334

act or behave, both visibly and vocally, that, for people everywhere, distinguish one kind of animal from another. Indeed, distinctive physical attributes or behaviour are, in whole or in part, often the focus of animal names. Nage examples include ngo ngoe, the onomatopoeic name of a wild cat, and “sharp wing,” referring to a falcon, as well as many other Nage bird names (Forth 2004a, 17–23), while for English we might recall “roadrunner,” “rattlesnake,” “bullhead,” and many more. Apart from specific morphological or behavioural attributes of animals that can readily be compared with attributes in humans, the manifest variety of such attributes suggests another reason animals make better metaphors than does just about anything else. Especially in view of the application of animal metaphors to a variety of human behaviours, the sheer variety of animal kinds and, furthermore, variation among individual animals of the same kind with respect to age, size, and physical condition, facilitates a ready, almost ineluctable, mapping of animal variation onto human variation. Something similar might be claimed for the variety of plant species. But apart from the fact that the world contains many more species of animals than plants (though some three-quarters of the former are insects), as already shown the unequivocally greater metaphorical potential of animals is easily accounted for by factors of manifest resemblance. The foregoing observations may recall Lévi-Strauss’s analysis of totemism, which he construed as involving “metaphor” in the Jakobsonian sense. But there are important differences. First, whereas Lévi-Strauss treated totemism as pertaining to segmentary groups composing a social whole, animal metaphors, among Nage and elsewhere, refer for the most part to distinctive and often temporary and situational features of human individuals. In fact, as is shown in the next chapter, only a minority of Nage animal metaphors refer to whole social categories (gender, social ranks, age classes, and the like). Second, in Lévi-Strauss’s theory, animal totems reflect a system of differences, so that what links people to totemic species is resemblance between a series of human groups on the one hand and plants or animals on the other. Accordingly, whereas conventional metaphors turn largely on recognizable resemblances between animals and their human referents, Lévi-Strauss treated resemblance between single totems and single groups, and any putative continuity between these (e.g., the notion that members of totemic groups descend from or share kinship with their totem) as being decidedly secondary and unnecessary to the relation. At the same time, whereas Lévi-Strauss’s theory of totemism has been criticized for its dismissal of the substantial (some

334

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 335

might say “ontological”) relations between individual totems and associated human collectivities, at least one feature of his model – the diversity of animal or otherwise natural kinds, inspiring what may be described as a metaphorical application of “metaphor” – somewhat ironically turns out to be more straightforwardly applicable to conventional animal metaphors. Although the prominence of animals in metaphor is mostly explained by a combination of perceptible resemblance between animals and humans and differences between contrasting animal kinds, one should not lose sight of the multifaceted practical, intellectual, and emotional interests animals hold for humans in all societies. With respect to resemblance we should also recall the fact that metaphor requires not only similarity between items in the source and target domains but also a degree of dissimilarity. This follows from the consciously figurative – one might even say deliberately fictional – character of metaphor, which requires a sufficient disparity between vehicle and referent for a particular kind of meaning to be conveyed (cf. Morgan 1993, 129). It would therefore make little sense using “sparrow” or “crow” as a metaphor for a pigeon since this would far more likely to be taken literally and so result in miscommunication. (Calling pigeons “rats of the air,” by contrast, is quite patently metaphorical – as is calling a known simpleton a “genius.”) Among animals known to Nage I can find none that is not metaphorically exploited, or is exploited less than others, because it is too similar to possible human referents or is too close spatially or too familiar. The monkey makes the point in reverse for not only is this animal one of the commonest metaphorical vehicles, but, despite the numerous ways in which monkeys closely resemble humans – a fact Nage themselves often remark upon – monkeys are nevertheless classified as “animals” (ana wa) and definitely not as “human beings” (kita ata; Forth 2016, 130–1). In other words, for Nage, animals of all kinds occupy the same side of a great ontological divide that separates them categorically from humans. And even though a greater similarity of some animals to human beings, most notably of course mammals, partly explains their greater metaphorical use, they are all equally animals and so sufficiently different from humans to serve as metaphors. Recalling the cognitivist argument that certain ideas are appealing and survive because they involve an ideal balance of intuitive and counter-intuitive elements and so achieve a “cognitive optimum” (Boyer 1994, 121–3), it may therefore be supposed that, in regard to resemblance and difference, animals exhibit a similarly superior ratio of human and non-human qualities.

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

335

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 336

9 Animal Metaphors in Social and Ontological Perspective

The previous chapter focuses on properties of animals motivating their use as metaphors. In this chapter I focus on the human referents of animal metaphors and thus their use in social interaction and relations among humans. After looking at the metaphors from both sides, as it were, I conclude with a discussion of what conventional animal metaphors can tell us about human-animal relations and whether they point to any distinctive ontological features in Nage thinking about animals. Connected with this last question, I show how a study of Nage animal metaphors contributes to recent anthropological discussion of ontological variation among human societies generally. Human Referents and the Use of Animal Metaphor in Social Relationships It is already clear that the majority of Nage animal metaphors have human beings as their referents. More specifically, 444 of the total of 566, or over 78 percent, do so. Among these I count five metaphors interpreted as referring to deceased human souls, most of which can also refer to living humans (specifically mourners). Almost 79 percent (189 of 240) of mammal metaphors refer to humans, thus virtually the same as the proportion for all animals. By contrast, bird metaphors reveal a slightly lower figure – just over 72 percent (129 of 178) – while the figures for other non-mammals and invertebrates are both higher (respectively, over 84 and 88 percent). Similarly, the proportion of wild mammal metaphors referring to humans (69 of 78, or

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 337

over 88 percent) is higher than metaphors incorporating domestic animals (120 of 162, or 74 percent). Accounting for these variations, however, is the higher number of birds and mammals, especially domestic mammals, employed in metaphors applied to other entities (plants, other animals, times of the day, artefacts, etc.), and, in absolute numbers, mammal and bird metaphors referring to people (317, or over 71 percent of the total of 444) still exceed metaphors incorporating other kinds of animals. As mentioned previously, only a minority of Nage animal metaphors are used self-referentially. The majority are expressed either in the second person, thus in direct address, or in the third. Where animal metaphors function as proverbs, on the other hand, they refer of course to no one in particular but instead advertise general ideas about humans or the human condition. Sometimes proverbs entail prescriptions, asserting, with reference to comparable features of animals, how people should live (e.g., Nos. 144 and 206, regarding the tails of cats and civets). But however employed, most metaphors possess a definite moral import and in this way offer insight into Nage social values. As noted in chapter 2, a majority of animal metaphors express a negative evaluation of their human referent, registering disapproval or being used derisively, in venting anger or in friendly banter as well as conventional exchanges between the sexes in the song genre called pata néke. This generally negative quality appears to bear out the commonly expressed view (though one based mostly on English metaphors) that “the great majority [of animal metaphors] are negative and pejorative” (Goatly 2006, 25; see also Sommer and Sommer 2011, who speak of “animal metaphors for human personality” as being “mostly uncomplimentary”). In some non-Western societies, however, animal metaphors appear to be proportionally more complimentary, at least contextually, as Olatéju (2005, 380) has shown for the Yoruba. And in any case, one needs to be more specific. By no means all metaphors in the Nage corpus reflect negatively on human referents. As with animal metaphors in English, a minority refer to positive qualities, while a larger number are neutral or ambiguous. “Neutral” metaphors include usages describing a relationship, practice, or institution – such as the several, mostly incorporating chickens, that distinguish human males and females or refer to relations between wife-giving and wife-taking affines (or, indeed, humans and god, No. 266). They also include many metaphors contained in proverbs, though where a proverb possesses a prescriptive aspect (e.g., “living like a porcupine,” No. 172, or “not living like a junglefowl,”

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

337

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 338

No. 367) a positive or negative sense is readily apparent. Metaphorical names for human body parts are by definition neutral. By contrast, metaphors that describe a person’s appearance by reference to a physical feature more or less peculiar to that individual (e.g., having hair like a fantail’s tail or a cockatoo’s crest, or having eyeballs like gecko’s eggs) are often used critically or derisively. Yet they can also be employed in a purely practical, descriptive way – for example, when distinguishing a person from others – and in most cases I have therefore classified them as neutral or ambiguous (two terms between which, in the present context, I do not attempt to distinguish). As these remarks should suggest, determining in which of these three categories a given metaphor fits has sometimes proved challenging, not least because a single expression can have more than one application and because interpretations sometimes combine negative and positive implications. For example, the metaphorical reference to a person having the character of the much reviled Russell’s viper (No. 430), probably the most feared of creatures known to Nage, is negative insofar as the person inspires fear in others but is also partly positive in that it implies boldness and a masterful personality. Nevertheless, in the majority of cases the determination has been reasonably straightforward. In virtually all instances evaluations have been made on the basis of informant commentary and observation of expressions in use, and if occasionally categorization has been arbitrary, this is unlikely to have affected the overall result. Results of this analysis are presented in table 4. As the table shows, over 10 percent of Nage animal metaphors are generally positive while nearly 27 percent can be classified as neutral. This then leaves a sizeable majority, around 63 percent, that are negative or uncomplimentary to human referents. Apart from lending support to the generalizations of other authors, the fact that over six in ten of the Nage metaphors refer to human traits they consider negative could be taken to reflect a generally negative attitude towards animals and even as symptomatic of a view of non-human animals as morally inferior to humans. However, the inference requires qualification. To the extent that Nage often speak negatively about non-human animals, characterizing them as lacking things they value – like houses, clothing, tools, fire, knowledge of cooking, or, in a word, “culture” (Forth 2016, 59–60) – then indeed Nage can be said to regard animals as inferior. As mentioned in chapter 1, they certainly regard humans and animals as very different sorts of beings, so that someone conceived as behaving like an animal or looking

338

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 339

like an animal is usually not looking or behaving well. Nevertheless, some qualities of animals are obviously considered positive, at least to the extent that comparable qualities of humans are also considered positive. What is more, attributes or behaviours that Nage consider undesirable in human beings are not necessarily considered undesirable, or equally undesirable, in an animal. An example is our eponymous metaphor concerning the urinating dog, which Nage apply to inconstant or inconsistent humans. Such conduct is definitely disapproved in a person. Yet Nage do not consider the way dogs urinate to be bad either for dogs or for humans; it is simply the way dogs are. As it happens, most dog metaphors, like Nage animal metaphors in general, do indeed cast their human referents in a negative light. Yet one needs to recall the typical specificity and selectivity of metaphors, the fact that they focus on just one or a few attributes of the animal vehicle; hence it cannot be assumed that qualities of an animal highlighted either in individual metaphors, or even the totality of metaphors incorporating a given animal, will be representative of any overall evaluation of that animal. Indeed, by all indications they are not. Thus not only dogs but many other animals Nage value, not just for utilitarian but for intellectual and affective reasons as well, provide vehicles for metaphors that, in the large majority of cases, reveal a negative evaluation of their human referent. On the other hand, animals Nage do not value so highly, including some they consider mostly or entirely negative, are nevertheless employed in metaphors with neutral or even positive human referents. Thus the monkey appears in four positive metaphors as does the porcupine, both animals and especially the first being known mostly for the serious damage they do to crops, and complimentary references to people can be found even among metaphors incorporating snakes, fish, and invertebrates. In general, therefore, differences in positive values that Nage attach to an animal appear not to correspond to differences in the degree to which metaphors employing that animal refer positively to attributes of human beings. There is, however, a qualification. If the figures for “positive” and “neutral” metaphors listed in table 4 are added together and then compared to the figures for negative metaphors, a somewhat different picture emerges. For the ratio of negative to positive and neutral usages then accords quite well with an animal’s overall value in Nage life. In particular, the figure for horses is 1:1, for pigs 5:3, and for buffalo and dogs 13:7. No other mammal begins to approach these ratios, except for the porcupine; however, the total number of metaphors incorporating this animal – just four – is very low.

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

339

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 340

Table 4 Human values in animal metaphors: life forms and

selected individual categories Total of

Metaphors

Generally

Generally

Neutral,

all

referring

negative

positive

ambiguous

metaphors

to humans

162

120

85

11

24

Buffalo

33

20

13

2

5

Horse

26

24

12

4

8

Cattle

2

2

2

0

0

Sheep

6

6

6

0

0

Goat

16

13

11

0

2

Dog

35

26

19

1

6

Domestic mammals (total)

Pig

25

16

10

4

2

Cat

19

13

12

0

1

Wild

78

69

55

9

5

mammals (total) Deer

8

6

5

1

0

Porcupine

5

4

2

2

0

Giant rat Rat, mouse

4

4

4

0

0

17

13

10

0

3

Shrew

4

4

4

0

0

Civet

8

7

5

2

0

32

31

25

4

2

All mammals

240

189

140

20

29

Birds

178

128

46

14

68

Monkey

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 341

Other

Total of

Metaphors

Generally

Generally

Neutral,

all

referring

negative

positive

ambiguous

metaphors

to humans

73

61

43

9

9

Snakes

22

16

12

2

2

Lizards

19

16

12

2

2

vertebrates (total)

Fish

12

12

5

4

3

Frogs

11

10

7

1

2

5

4

4

0

0

Invertebrates

75

66

49

4

13

Grand totals

566

444

279

47

119

Crocodile

Cats, on the other hand, produce a contrary result, as all but one of the thirteen cat metaphors with human referents are negative and none is positive – in spite of the value these animals hold as mousers and a Nage conception of house cats as quite special creatures, indicated by several taboos and other usages (Forth 2016, 103–4). The figures for deer are also surprising in view of their status as the most highly prized of game animals. Just one of the six deer metaphors is positive while the remainder are all negative; but the total for this animal is also low (the same as for virtually extra-territorial sheep). This too is a surprising result, and yet another surprise comes with the figures for fish and geckos. Just 5 of the 12 fish metaphors refer negatively to humans, while 3 are neutral and 4 are positive (thus yielding a ratio of 5:7, higher than those for all mammals). Similarly, 3 of the 7 metaphors employing the Tokay gecko are negative while 2 of the remaining 4 are positive and 2 are neutral. (Metaphors employing other lizards as vehicles – monitors and skinks – are negative without exception.) Bird metaphors require a separate mention since, in comparison with metaphors incorporating all other life forms, the number with negative human referents is low, less than 36 percent of the total of 128. By the same

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

341

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 342

token, the ratio of negative to positive and neutral metaphors combined is just over 1:2 (46:82). Even so, the proportion of bird metaphors with positive referents (11 percent) is only slightly higher than that for all mammals (10.6 percent) and is actually lower than that for wild mammals (13 percent), and it is accordingly the number of neutral referents that is high (over 53 percent). The relatively fewer negative associations of bird metaphors can then be attributed to the relatively high number that refer to human body parts, bodily features (long-leggedness, short stature), hair styles (compared to birds’ crests and tails), and vocal qualities, the majority of which are neither clearly positive nor negative. Animal Metaphors in Social Use Since nearly four-fifths of Nage animal metaphors refer to human characteristics, behaviours, and the like, questions naturally arise as to how far such usages reflect features of Nage social life and values. In fact, many metaphors instance one or more general principles or themes of Nage society. In the last chapter, I demonstrated how animal metaphors are often synonymous or at least very similar in meaning to one or more others. Pairs or clusters of synonymous metaphors necessarily express common social themes, but only in a relatively small measure do synonymous metaphors compose these themes. As mentioned in chapter 2, only a minority of animal metaphors refer to whole categories of people – for example, social statuses, the genders, age classes, or named populations. Exceptions include “ancient horns” (very old people), “Nage dog(s)” (Nage men in general), “cock” and “hen” (male and female infants), “young cock” (a young man whose voice is breaking), “young hen” (a prospective bride), “lost fowl” (deceased wife-takers), and “god’s chickens” (humans in general). In addition, “buffalo” and “dog” distinguish people of high and low rank, respectively (see Nos. 10, 20, 91), as somewhat less definitely do “Giant rat” and “mouse (or rat)” (Nos. 182, 184). Other metaphors with a collective human reference include “Kebi sheep,” “‘Ua goats,” “Geo cats,” and Réndu monkeys,” the first pair applying to all inhabitants of two regions, and the second pair more specifically to the men of those regions. To these one might add the numerous metaphors applied to young children whose behaviour adults find bothersome and the few that implicitly refer to people of low social standing. Nevertheless, the large

342

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 343

majority of Nage animal metaphors describe individuals with reference to often very specific features distinguishing them, mostly situationally and temporarily, from other people. The majority of such metaphors can be used for either men or women. Some 15 percent refer exclusively or primarily to one gender or the other, with the largest number (forty-four, or 10 percent of the total of 444) referring to men, and far fewer (twenty-three) referring to women. These figures do not provide the whole picture, as more detailed study would likely reveal a greater application of otherwise gender-neutral metaphors to one gender or the other as well as differences in the gender of speakers. Even so, it is noteworthy how the greater incidence of animal metaphors referring to males replicates the findings of Sommer and Sommer’s (2011) study of animal metaphors employed by American students. Writing on South American animal metaphors, Gary Urton (1985) similarly remarks how the majority of these, including macaws among the Bororo, “overwhelmingly” apply specifically to men. On the other hand, the representations of which Urton speaks, it is important to note, are generally not conventional metaphors but “metaphor” in an extended, structuralist sense (see chapter 2). Whether the usages are sex-specific or not, several factors affect the incidence of Nage men applying metaphors to women or vice versa, particularly in direct address. For one thing, males may properly use expressions considered coarse, especially ones relating to sexual activity, only in the presence of marriageable females, notably matrilateral cross-cousins and other women of the category li ana, and brothers’ wives (ipa). Both relationships allow, even encourage, special licence in interpersonal dealings. An exception to this may be the genre named pata néke (see chapter 2), where male and female singers not specifically related in these ways direct sexually suggestive metaphors (e.g., No. 234, concerning masturbating monkeys) to all members of the opposite gender – especially since address in pata néke is collective rather than individual, so that potentially offensive language need not be taken personally. Nevertheless, when I brought this up, Nage insisted that, in this context too, a man should not employ sexually suggestive metaphors except when addressing women who are unrelated, or who could be married or engaged in a sexual relationship. Whatever the case, the Nage corpus does not bear out Goatly’s (2006, 28) observation that “sex specific pejorative metaphors” tend to refer to females, a claim the author illustrates entirely with English usages. And in

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

343

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 344

this respect it is noteworthy that several Nage metaphors employing female animals as vehicles (e.g., Nos. 18, 69, 272, 273) can be applied to men as well as women and that one (No. 271) refers to men exclusively. Of the 444 animal metaphors applying to humans, I count sixty (or 13.5 percent) that refer to physical features or conditions – mostly facial or bodily appearance but also vocal characteristics and, in one instance, body odour (“smelling like a shrew,” No. 199). Accordingly, nearly nine in ten refer to human behaviours, actions, characters, or circumstances. Among those pertaining to physical attributes, only two – “fine stallion” (denoting a handsome man) and “face like a junglefowl cock” (referring to a striking or animated male face) – are positive. Curiously perhaps, with the arguable exception of “hair that looks like it has been licked by a snake” (No. 419), none refers to an attractive woman – described literally as a “good, fine woman” (bu’e modhe). Many other metaphors describing physical appearance are neutral, not clearly expressing either approval or disapproval, but as accords with the finding for Nage metaphors in general, the majority can be classified as negative. A distinction of a different sort concerns several uncomplimentary usages advertising human physical traits that appear purely notional. For example, describing a man as “having only one testicle like a male rat” (No. 180) does not require a perception or conviction that the referent really is a monorchid. Nor for that matter does it definitely entail a view of male rats as typically exhibiting this condition (Forth 2016, 259). In a similar vein, accusing someone of having a face like a monkey (No. 211) or looking like a cat gripping a chicken in its mouth (No. 149) are intended less as factual assessments of people’s appearance than as expressions of the speaker’s feelings about the addressee. As discussed in individual commentaries, such expressions are mostly employed in more or less friendly banter, especially among men. But this is not to suggest that Nage do not similarly employ metaphors that appear better grounded in observation – for example, when teasing someone about having a large belly (like a Giant rat’s or a pregnant mare), a raucous laugh (like the harsh cry of a dollarbird), or large buttocks (like a tree ant). At the same time, and unlike the foregoing examples, many metaphors of this sort – whether used to convey disapproval or serving a largely descriptive end – refer not to a more or less permanent physical feature but describe a situational disposition or condition. Instances include describing someone bending over to lift a heavy object as “having a waist like a dog shitting” (No.

344

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 345

109), a person with a covered head as looking like “a large owl” (No. 389), or someone who is out of breath as “a goby (fish) in shallow water” (No. 465). Of metaphors referring to humans behaving in specific ways or finding themselves in particular circumstances – thus by far the majority – most suggest one or more of a series of social and moral themes. Communicating either disapproval or (in a far smaller number of instances) approval of the trait or condition in question, some of these themes are quite expectable as they express values most human societies are likely to hold – for instance, disapproval of dishonesty, duplicity, or deceit (three similar attributes I treat together); disobedience and insubordination; undue aggressiveness or pugnacity; and actions considered ill-mannered or coarse. Other metaphors, however, are rather more interesting since, by virtue of their associated themes and the number of usages reflecting a theme, they suggest special social concerns bound up with more specific features of Nage social life. Sexuality might be thought a thoroughly expectable human concern. Nevertheless it is worth noting that at least forty usages refer to undesirable sexual proclivities or relationships – for example, calling a man a “Nage dog” or a “crocodile” or describing him as a “ram striking everything with its horns,” or calling a woman or man a “hen that lays eggs in various places.” Sexual metaphors are, of course, also typical of the genre named pata néke, where men and women in turn tease or deride members of the opposite gender. Among the forty sexual metaphors are several that more specifically concern illicit unions or misconduct by marriage partners; examples include Nos. 10, 51, 55, 56, 87, 91, 178, 499, 502, and 509. Not always relating to sex or marriage, another cluster of metaphors, some half a dozen or so, concern exceptional and largely disapproved relations among kin. Among these are usages advertising excessive emotional attachment of parents to children (No. 14) or of children to parents (No. 466), and the undesirable conditions of being an only child (No. 361), a child of unknown paternity (No. 448), or a person with few kin (No. 514). Somewhat contrary to expectation, Nage appear to have no animal metaphors for orphans, nor in regard to sex and marriage, any pertaining to rape or, exclusively, to adultery. Incest in a broad sense is covered by metaphors employing the monitor lizard and the crocodile (Nos. 445, 486). Nage society is organized into kin groups that, at various levels of segmentation, act corporately (especially in respect to land tenure), require mutual assistance between members, and further operate as units of marriage

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

345

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 346

exchange and affinal alliance. Therefore it is hardly surprising that a number of metaphors refer to attitudes or behaviours that either promote or disrupt or fail to maintain group unity and solidarity. Two usages contrast buffalo dung (No. 6) and goat droppings (No. 70) as references to group unity and disunity, respectively, while another two (Nos. 205, 209) similarly express disapproval of groups that fail to hold together when confronting a common adversary or adversity. Exemplified by “buffalo that wrecks its enclosure” (No. 13), “cat biting its own tail” (No. 145), and two rat metaphors (Nos. 186, 187), another four expressions more specifically refer to people who cause trouble within their own group, and yet another – “frog of two rivers” (No. 479) – describes someone with divided loyalties. As some of these usages reveal, Nage often speak of social groups, and especially kin or descent groups, as spatial entities and, more specifically, as houses. “House” (sa’o) can therefore denote a lineage or a unit of affinal alliance, and, in the same vein, “big house, long gallery” (sa’o méze, téda léwa) describes a more inclusive group of relatives. In itself metaphoric and indeed instancing a cross-culturally widespread conceptual metaphor, this identification further illuminates animal metaphors expressing disapproval of people who fail to maintain a single, stable residence; who change residence unnecessarily; and who move about in an irregular or disorderly manner. Symptomatic of a value of general and quite distinctive import for the constitution of Nage society, over a dozen metaphors attest to these closely linked themes. Among these are usages expressing disapproval of a wandering, unrestrained lifestyle, three of which employ the horse as the vehicle (Nos. 36, 46, 50) – presumably because, in contrast to other animals, horses can be and should be trained to behave in an orderly way. On the other hand, two usages referring to unreliable or unpredictable people (Nos. 87, 103), in one instance a wife, use the dog, another trainable animal, as their vehicle. Further examples describe excessively mobile people as “monkeys jumping from tree to tree” (No. 223), and a man who moves around a lot and is therefore difficult to locate as a “wild pig” (No. 134) – a usage also connoting irregular sexuality (see “child of a wild pig,” No. 120). Other metaphors of this general sort employ the irregular egg-laying habits of certain hens (Nos. 272–4) or contrast porcupines and junglefowl (Nos. 172, 367) as creatures which, respectively, occupy permanent dens and do not maintain regular roosting sites. Another calls on the dolphin (No. 463) to characterize a person who is given to disap-

346

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 347

pearing and suddenly reappearing or whose presence in a place is irregular. And yet another compares people who, indecisively, move their family several times before finally settling down to a “cat that moves its kittens” (No. 151). In several respects Nage also conceive of a marriage, a union sanctioned by the payment of bridewealth, as a house. Accordingly, partners in extramarital liaisons are depicted as “goats in undergrowth” and “pigs rooting in vines” (Nos. 71, 129) – thus animals engaged in animal behaviour in places outside of settlements and certainly outside of houses. After a marriage is fully transacted, a woman typically moves to her husband’s village, where she should remain, returning to the house of her parents only on special occasions when she formally visits as a member of her husband’s group, thus as a “wife-taker.” Metaphors expressing disapproval of behaviour contravening this norm are “dog from Labo” (No. 87) and “wasp piercing vegetables” (No. 499), while virtually the same wasp metaphor condemns an inconstant male suitor who “flits” from one prospective wife to another (No. 502). By no means are married couples always expected to have a house of their own, at least not in the early days of their marriage, and many live for a number of years in extended family households, usually the husband’s. Even so, Nage generally hold in low regard people who reside in the houses of unrelated people or distant kin, describing them as “chickens without a coop” (No. 265). Before the introduction of wet rice cultivation, the Nage economy was based largely on swiddening, which involved regularly abandoning fields and opening new ones. Nevertheless, maintaining permanent villages (bo’a) with permanent houses, where major rituals were performed and graves were laid, was and remains fundamental to Nage identity. Accordingly, the village is the centre of social and traditional religious life, even though villagers’ fields are often located some considerable distance away, and it is in this context that Nage employ “crocodile of the lower regions” (No. 487) as a pejorative reference to people who rarely leave their fields, spend little time in their villages, and are rarely involved in and contribute little to community affairs. Revealing much the same concern are metaphors describing people who rarely leave their houses or appear in public (“civet inside a palm trunk” and “grub sniffing its own arse,” Nos. 202, 543) and expressions referring to people who insufficiently participate in group discussions (“dove looking at a pool of water,” No. 401; and “cockroach on the edge of a plate,” No. 532; see also “turtle that turns its head from side to side,” No. 490). How far the first two

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

347

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 348

metaphors imply lack of participation specifically in the life of a larger group is somewhat unclear. Nevertheless, all can be construed as advertising a more general failure to engage with others. As significant as their concern with “staying in place” – and maintaining relations with people equally associated with one’s place – is the value Nage put on what anthropologists call “generalized reciprocity,” an uncalculating give and take expected of members of the same social group. This finds expression in a series of metaphors, about ten in all, referring to indolence or shiftlessness, avoiding work, and relying on other people’s generosity. Instances include “Channel-billed cuckoo” (a bird parasitic on crows, No. 255), “coucal with a rotten anus” (No. 310), “snake in an orchard” (No. 422), “monitor lizard collecting ants” (No. 441), “tadpole feeding on dirt” (No. 484) and “praying mantis on top of a cotton blossom” (No. 498). At first glance, the number of such metaphors might suggest something like a tropical Protestant ethic. But, unlike some Westerners, Nage do not view industry as an end in itself; rather, they simply require people to work in order to support themselves and their families and to contribute to collective efforts – for example, by lending agricultural assistance to kin and neighbours and providing for group rituals. Also consistent with a value on reciprocity and mutual assistance are another dozen or more metaphors expressing disapproval of greed, including expressions that refer more specifically to insufficient reticence or excessive eagerness when food is offered (e.g., “horse that dances to the drum” No. 41; “bronzeback (snake) whose tail alone remains” No. 436), and several usages describing stinginess (“small wasp (and) fig sap,” No. 501), unwillingness to share (“buffalo that blocks the wallow,” No. 12), and ingratitude or, more specifically, treating badly someone whose generosity one enjoys (“stick horse, dog adept at climbing,” Nos. 49, 85; “Giant rat’s belly,” No. 179). Equally relevant are several metaphors expressing disapproval of people who too freely do what others tell them or give in to requests – thereby using up resources that should be expended on one’s family or meeting the demands of others (such as affines) to whom one is more definitely obligated (see “horse with a soft neck,” No. 47; “dog tame with everyone,” No. 98; “neck like a banana beetle,” No. 522) – as well as metaphors referring to wastefulness or profligacy (“cockatoos and crows,” No. 307) and unrewarded effort (Nos. 256 and 382, incorporating the Channel-billed cuckoo and the koel).

348

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 349

On the positive side, the value on reciprocity and helping others is further attested in metaphors referring approvingly to people who are generous or especially helpful (“horse that accepts a large rice container,” No. 39), willing to share (Nos. 318, 340, employing the drongo and friarbird), and considerate of their fellows (“frogs have livers, crayfish have bellies,” Nos. 481, 550). Possibly also belonging here is “mouse taking care of a Giant rat” (No. 183), though this can alternatively be counted as one more metaphor implying excessive or unnecessary generosity, specifically towards outsiders. Although conceivably connected with the foregoing, an otherwise separate series of metaphors, as many as fourteen, concerns performing tasks improperly. Some simply refer to doing something inefficiently or ineffectually, like “buffalo carrying vines on its head” (No. 4); “monkey carrying a gourd,” (No. 222); “monkey roasting a crayfish,” (No. 224); and “cockroach slamming into a spider’s web” (No. 533). Others express disapproval of people who work inconsistently – not seeing a task through to completion or stopping one thing and beginning another and thereby “mixing tasks.” An obvious example is our eponymous metaphor concerning the urinating dog (No. 93). Others include “rat with a broken placenta” (No. 188), “fly alighting on sores” (No. 516), and, in part, “rat without an escape hole” (No. 189) and “earthworm unable to re-enter the earth” (No. 561). This somewhat distinctive theme warrants further comment, since it suggests a quite specific cultural value. In various contexts, Nage require linked tasks that make up a project, such as building a house or laying a field, to be conducted in a regular sequence and carried through to completion before beginning another – thus quite contrary to the modern Western value on “multitasking” (a concept and practice that has recently received extensive attention in the psychological literature; see, e.g., Salvucci and Taatgen 2011).1 The same principle can be discerned in metaphors critically describing people who change their mind (“mouse turned into a Giant rat,” No. 184; “cockatoo’s wings,” No. 306) or who proceed in an irregular manner with quick changes of direction (“tiny bat,” No. 248; see also No. 332, “fantail does not want to agree,” denoting a fickle woman). And equally illustrative are metaphors expressing disapproval of speakers who jump from topic to topic, like “a monkey leaping from tree to tree” (No. 223), or suddenly change topics, like “a drongo’s broken tail” (No. 317). At the same time, this last pair of metaphors can be counted among a group of over twenty that focus on a more general theme of speaking improperly –

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

349

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 350

which is to say, in a disorderly, excessive, incoherent, untrustworthy, or harmful way. Instances include “butting of female goats” (No. 69), referring to thoughtless speech likely to have negative consequences; “goat on one hill, dog on another” (Nos. 75, 92), describing people who speak at cross-purposes; “dog that jumps on coconut dregs” (No. 95), referring to someone who misinterprets what is being said; “shrew” (No. 197), denoting a gossip; “tongue of a bronzeback snake” (No. 435), describing a smooth talker; “bees inside a nest” (No. 512) and “calling frogs” (No. 480), both referring to people who speak incoherently or noisily; and “dung beetle informs the earthquake” (No. 520), meaning a bearer of false news. In addition, several expressions employing the monkey and another incorporating the mysterious “you fowl” identify people who make false or hypocritical accusations (see Nos. 171, 176, 225, 283). While such metaphors might be expected to draw on vocal characteristics of the zoological vehicle, the majority, interestingly enough, are motivated instead by other physical qualities of the animals concerned. Other themes are more specific still but nonetheless suggest similarly general concerns. As many as ten metaphors describe bodily uncleanliness or personal untidiness. To refer to dirty or messy people, Nage thus speak of a “buffalo defecating as it moves” (No. 5), “sheep’s diarrhea” (No. 66), “cat’s face” (No. 152), “smelling like a shrew” (No. 199), “civet covering its droppings” (No. 201), “sheep’s placenta” (No. 67), and “chicken with feathered legs” (No. 264), the last two expressions referring to people who wear ill-fitting or excessive clothing. Three other metaphors of this sort have the monkey as their vehicle (see Nos. 212, 214, 215), thereby suggesting the monkey’s morphological resemblance to humans as part of the motivation. This concern with cleanliness may seem curious. Nage nowadays bathe regularly and otherwise keep clean, though what they say about the past implies that this was less true of people in former times, partly because of greater difficulty in gaining access to water. On the other hand, difficulty keeping clean and tidy does not mean that people will not aspire to do so, and in any case lack of cleanliness is always relative and often a question of perception. Employing goats, dogs, monkeys, rats, and insect larvae, another six metaphors describe people who are restive or who fidget (see Nos. 80, 94, 192, 238, 541, 545), a concern not implausibly connected with Nage disapproval of people who do not maintain a permanent residence and so display a more general spatial instability (see “scampering rat,” No. 192, which subsumes both meanings). All of the six can be applied to adults and so are partly dis-

350

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 351

tinguished from the larger series of usages, a dozen in all, which refers to annoying children who, by way of boisterous, rowdy, or otherwise bothersome behaviour, invoke the ire of adults. Like most people, Nage are generally fond of young children and, by Western standards at least, can even appear indulgent. On the other hand, because many adult activities, including relatively public events to which kin and neighbours are invited, take place inside houses – where of course people also care for children – youngsters and their demands often interfere with the conduct of these activities, as they can with adult attempts simply to get on with chores or rest and relax. Yet only rarely do Nage actively discipline children – with corporal punishment or removal, or even with direct reprimands. Instead, they voice criticism and complaints that often appear more to perform a cathartic function than to have a discernable effect on the behaviour of the children, and it is here that animal metaphors play a major part. While four usages expressing exasperation at children’s misbehaviour employ mammals – specifically goats, dogs, pigs, and monkeys (see Nos. 72, 80, 104, 127, 235) – the vehicles in most cases are biting insects or arachnids. It is an easy inference that it is both the physical discomfort they cause and the creatures’ small size that motivates their association with bothersome children. At the same time, all these metaphors may owe something to the connection revealed in other Nage usages (see chapter 1) between children and animals in general. In accordance with the far lower number of positive metaphors, positive themes do not form sizeable clusters to the extent that do negative expressions. Exceptions are the previously mentioned series referring to people who are helpful and considerate and the several metaphors alluding to social unity or solidarity. Another group comprises six metaphors, mostly employed when ritually addressing benevolent spirits, which express a desire for prolificity in humans and livestock, and whose vehicles include pigs, chickens, junglefowl, quails, fish fry, and ants (see Nos. 123, 270, 369, 396, 469, 510). A dozen or more metaphors describe people with exceptional skills or other admired qualities. But these are quite various and include expressions describing physical strength or exceptional energy (“veins of a friarbird,” No. 345), agility and manual skill (“hands and arms like a monkey,” No. 216; and “hands like a gecko,” No. 455), sturdiness and toughness (“flying fox’s elbow,” No. 244), a fine singing voice (“wailing civet,” No. 207), skill in speaking (“bronzeback’s tongue,” No. 435), and speed (“bronzeback,” No. 434). Others refer to personal good fortune (“friarbird,” No. 338) and qualities of persistence (two gecko

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

351

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 352

metaphors, Nos. 451, 457), boldness (Nos. 126, 553, incorporating the pig and a crayfish), dominance (Nos. 430, 440, employing two kinds of snakes), obedience (a horse metaphor, No. 44), and honesty (“straight like a civet’s tail,” No. 206). In contrast to their vehicles, which often describe animals behaving in quite specific ways, human referents of most Nage animal metaphors do not concern people engaged in specific tasks but are, instead, applicable to human activity in any number of contexts. An interesting exception is the annual pugilistic competitions called etu, to which I have necessarily referred in individual commentaries. Six metaphors (Nos. 17, 148, 306, 337, , 500, 551) relate to men engaged in etu. However, in only one, “cat from Geo” (No. 148), is this activity the exclusive context, whereas the others are more generally applied. “Dove droppings” (No. 408) might be counted as an additional instance, but this refers to an artefact rather than to a behaviour. Even so, the pugilistic referents were all mentioned by Nage commentators, and most if not all seem to have a special relevance for talking about these competitions. The Social Efficacy of Animal Metaphors Animal metaphors should not be expected to reflect every aspect of a society. Some will be reflected instead in different sorts of metaphors (plant metaphors, metaphors employing inanimate objects) while others may find no metaphorical expression at all. Still, Nage animal metaphors offer insight into a fairly wide range of values, principles, interests, and common concerns, and to that extent provide a fuller understanding of Nage society and culture – not to mention their knowledge of and relations with non-human animals (a matter discussed throughout Forth 2016). Quite another sort of question concerns the operation of animal metaphors in face-to-face relations and everyday social intercourse. Exemplified by metaphors appearing in proverbs, some usages serve a didactic or corrective purpose, and their content is typically positive or neutral, approvingly describing how things are or should be. The same is true of metaphors more simply referring to individuals displaying qualities that are generally admired, as when someone is described as especially helpful or skilled in some way. Of course, the majority of expressions incorporating animal metaphors, which have a decidedly negative import, can also serve a didactic function, although their main use is to voice disapproval of particular individuals. Obviously such criticism will have most

352

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 353

impact when uttered in direct address. But this is not to argue that Nage employ negative metaphors (or positive ones for that matter) in an entirely calculated way. For many are used in anger or when annoyed, and, as noted earlier, some appear to function cathartically for speakers rather than informatively or correctively for others. Nevertheless, it can be presumed that the use of animal metaphors serves to express and, in some measure, maintain and reinforce social values by advertising qualities that Nage consider good or (in the majority of instances) those they regard as bad. But this leaves the question of whether animal metaphors are more effective in this respect than are either other sorts of metaphors or literal language. This is a very large topic to which I cannot possibly expect to do full justice. However, taking cues from Nage usage, several observations can be registered. With negative metaphors, referring to someone as an animal or displaying attributes resembling an animal’s might seem all the more offensive insofar as this implies that the referent is not a human being or not fully human. On the other hand, since Nage (and one assumes other people as well) understand conventional metaphors figuratively, and thus as not really asserting that a person is an animal, then to that extent they could be received as a milder and, by virtue of their very conventionality, more acceptable way of expressing criticism – less severe than any literal, extemporary, and more pointed disapprobation. Nevertheless, the negative attribute is still contained in the metaphor’s interpretation, even though, in the Nage idiom, it is somewhat “covered up” or “disguised” (péle) by the animal vehicle. And to that extent the negative force of the metaphor is real enough. Otherwise expressed, the identification of a person with a non-human animal is preserved despite the recognized figurative character of the expression. Thus, whereas the “unreal” character of the metaphorical equation allows the expression – and the disapprobation to which it gives voice – not to be taken completely seriously or accepted in full measure, the interpretation of the metaphor (of which people should generally be aware) ensures its efficacy. This ambiguity of metaphor, and in the present case specifically animal metaphors, is further connected with another feature of such expressions – namely, their humorous character. This often became apparent when observing animal metaphors in use or when talking to people about particular expressions. Of course, not all animal metaphors are found amusing (positive metaphors usually are not) but many are, including a good number that refer

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

353

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 354

to human qualities deemed either mildly or seriously negative. Like puns and other rhetorical devices that identify different senses of a single word or phrase, metaphors, and perhaps especially metaphors linking animals and humans, confuse categorical distinctions and identify things that are normally separated, and it would appear to be mainly for this reason that they are commonly found to be humorous. However, humour evoked by animal metaphors can be seen not only as a function of their figurative character (itself the source of their ambiguity) but also as a factor augmenting recognition of their figurativeness and so similarly modifying their negative import. The combination may then make unfavourable evaluations that critical metaphors convey easier to take emotionally and more acceptable intellectually, even while the implicit criticism is understood and possibly accepted. If these remarks apply less to metaphors designating positive human qualities, the difference is obviously attributable to the fact that qualities of the animal, whether explicit in the expression or merely implicit, are ones people admire or to which they aspire. After all, not only Nage but people in general recognize that, in regard to many qualities (including their strength, speed, and endurance), animals are superior to humans, notwithstanding any general assessment of humans as, on the whole, superior to animals or as superior in other respects. As regards European perspectives, moreover, it is worth noting that, despite ubiquitous citations of Descartes as typifying a Western view of animals as unthinking and unfeeling automata – a rhetorical strategy especially favoured, it seems, by neo-animists and ontological pluralists – earlier and more recent philosophers from Montaigne to Midgley (2002) have taken quite the opposite position,2 as among natural scientists did Darwin (1872) in his ground-breaking demonstration of the continuity between humans and animals in regard to emotion and the expression of the emotions. From the manifestly positive value of certain qualities of animals, it therefore follows that a Nage man described, for example, as “a fine stallion” – meaning physically attractive and well turned out – will simply take this as a compliment. And owing to the typical specificity of animal metaphors, it further follows that he will not consider the characterization as implying that he has a face like a horse or eats like a horse (see “horse with its bridle removed,” No. 48). Of course, for the metaphor to work in the way intended, its conventional interpretation must be understood, and if it were not, then calling someone a horse, even a fine horse, could well be taken negatively.

354

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 355

Anthropomorphism, Animism, and Ontological Pluralism In a more general frame, how statements referring to someone as an animal are understood should depend on a particular view of relations between humans and animals. In a society in which non-human animals are considered fundamentally similar to humans, equal to humans, or even as types of humans, animal metaphors might function quite differently from what one finds among Westerners – and by all indications among Nage as well. But it does not follow that, in such a society, animal metaphors could never express disapproval or otherwise be used negatively. For if it is assumed that people the world over regard humans and the various animals with which they are familiar as belonging, at some level, to separate categories, then describing people as acting like any kind of animal, for example, would still entail their behaving like something they are not. In that case, one might imagine animal metaphors in our hypothetical society as a variety of “human metaphors,” usages describing people as occupying social categories to which they do not belong – as when a pampered girl is called a “princess” or someone not employed by a circus is derisively labelled a “clown.” But how one might detect any such ontological or epistemological difference in a society’s animal metaphors is quite another matter. Conventional animal metaphors are, before all else, standard statements regularly uttered in natural languages. Yet simply from the form of a statement it is not possible to discern the relation imagined by speakers between the animal vehicle and any human referent, or indeed whether an utterance is intended metaphorically at all. Thus the statement “Sadie is a dog” could be an uncomplimentary metaphorical reference to a human female or, alternatively, a literal statement of fact (referring, for example, to a small terrier once owned by my parents). What is more, a metaphor of exactly the same form can have different meanings in different speech communities. To cite one illustration, an Aboriginal Australian referring to a person as a “crow” (meaning a member of a certain social group) is saying something quite different from an Afrikaans or Dutch-speaker making the same statement (and meaning, in the first instance, that the person is “slender,” and in the second that he or she is “spirited and quick witted,” Dirven 1994, 74). Quite apart from the fact that the bird name in the three instances will refer to slightly different ornithological species, it might be objected that, in the first case,

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

355

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 356

the speaker is not using a conventional metaphor at all but either is not speaking metaphorically or is doing so only in the sense employed by Lévi-Strauss in his interpretation of totemism. Be that as it may, both in the Australian and European examples a human is verbally identified as an animal, and an animal of roughly the same sort, while in each case the statement conveys a different meaning and reflects a different motivation – and in the Australian case, presumably manifests a different view of relations between animals and humans in general. Where the metaphorical import of a statement can be established – from local commentary or from observing contexts of its use – animal metaphors applied to human beings are obvious instances of zoomorphism, speaking of people as animals or as like animals. Conventional metaphors of any sort are also invariably asymmetric, so that whereas Nage employ “urinating dog …” to describe people who prosecute a task inconsistently or without following through to the end, they never speak of dogs urinating as “inconsistent people.” In the same way, anglophones may characterize a despicable person as a “rat” but never describe a rat as a “despicable person.” On the other hand, they may conceive (although not usually speak) of rats as despicable animals. As this suggests, despite the asymmetry of conventional animal metaphors, zoomorphism implies its opposite, that is, anthropomorphism or, more specifically, an implicit personification (Kövecses 2010, 39) of animals – a view consistent with “interactionist” theories of metaphor most closely associated with Max Black (1962). Supporting this approach, one could then argue that calling a person a dog, for example, is possible only to the extent that dogs display traits and behaviours that are recognized as in some way similar to those that can be observed in humans. A review of the Nage corpus may suggest that different animal metaphors incorporate anthropomorphism in different ways or to varying degrees. An agile man described as having the “hands” of a Tokay gecko (No. 455) is someone whose hands and arms possess a degree of skill, especially in climbing and grasping, comparable to that found in the limbs of the lizard. Speaking of an inconsistent worker as a “dog pissing at the edge of a path” is different, insofar as the dog’s act of urination, something obviously natural to dogs, is not identified with the way (some) humans urinate but rather with a disapproved manner of discharging any variety of humans tasks, most and perhaps all of which a dog would be incapable of carrying out. Nevertheless, in both of these examples what is attributed to the animal vehicle – limbs in one case

356

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 357

corresponding to the limbs of the human referent, and in the other the capacity to urinate (though identified with quite different human behaviours) – is something that the animal palpably possesses or of which it is capable. In contrast, other metaphors apparently attribute to an animal qualities or actions that are normally ascribed only to humans (in part because most implicitly require linguistic ability). Thus, Nage speak of a monkey “scolding” a pig (No. 225) and “accusing” porcupines and Giant rats (Nos. 171, 176), a monkey “roasting” crayfish (No. 224), a mouse “mocking” a Giant rat (No. 182), a monitor lizard “tricking” ants, crustacean larvae doing the same to smaller fish fry (Nos. 442, 560), the friarbird “ordering, reserving” the sun (No. 350), and swallows “commanding” the months (No. 413). Similarly, another three metaphors (see Nos. 86, 430, 534) imply that the animals named possess “mind” (ngai zede) or “(force of) character, masterfulness” (waka), or “thoughts” and “feelings” (ate, literally “liver,” and tuka, literally “belly,” see No. 481). The fact is, however, that all of these actions, qualities, and properties are things that Nage do indeed ordinarily regard as exclusively human, so that none supports an interpretation of their animal metaphors implying a closer identity of humans and animals, as a general property of thought, any more than do, say, English animal metaphors. Not only do Nage understand metaphors depicting one animal “accusing” or “mocking” another animal as being as figurative as the animal names in relation to their non-animal referents, but comparable metaphors also occur in English. One thinks, for example, of “sedulous” apes, foxes being “charged with guarding” henhouses, “poor” church mice, “happy” clams, wolves “wearing” sheep’s “clothing,” dogs “lying (speaking falsely),” and “drunk” skunks.3 In addition, Nage metaphors describing animals as possessing human attributes of “mind” or “character” should be understood as referring more to qualities of their human referents than the animal vehicles – just as in English, describing someone as having the “manners of a pig” does not require any notion that pigs actually have manners. In fact, the point of this last expression is precisely that they do not. However interesting these comparisons may be, reviewing indications of anthropomorphism in individual metaphors only takes us so far in exploring how speaking of humans as animals may reflect cross-cultural differences in conceptions of relations between the two categories. Typically rejecting any concept of anthropomorphism, portrayed as a distinctively Western notion

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

357

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 358

that compromises a proper understanding of non-Western views of the world, a very different approach is suggested by several perspectives that have been brought together under the heading of the “ontological turn,” or what is more conveniently called “ontological pluralism.” Within this camp, a division is found between writers who characterize different societies as employing different “ontologies” (e.g., Descola 2013) – fundamentally different understandings of what sort of things exist in the world and how they are related – and others who propose a methodological (and quite explicitly political) use of ethnography to develop new concepts and new ways of interpreting and understanding human beings that would, in effect, replace what proponents view as a specifically Western (or “Cartesian”) philosophy that, when applied to non-Westerners, necessarily distorts its subject (Holbraad and Pedersen 2017, 14–17). Nevertheless, both approaches entail a view that non-Western societies, or some of these, conceive of a relation between humans and non-human animals that is radically different from what is found in Western thought. Indeed, hypothetical differences in ways people think about animals, specifically, have played a very large part in the “ontological turn,” as shown especially by the work of Descola (2013) and Viveiros de Castro (e.g., 1998, 2014). Although Descola has constructed a model of four different ontologies, the fundamental opposition in his theoretical scheme, as in the writings of other pluralists (e.g., Ingold), is between “naturalism,” characterized as a distinctly Western ontology, and “animism,” a deliberate redeployment of the term E.B. Tylor (1866, 1958) applied to any understanding of the world that attributes “life” and “souls” not just to all animate beings but to inanimate things as well. Where discernible in a more conventional anthropology, “naturalism” is criticized for depicting the ideas of others – and especially ideas inconsistent with or unsupported by modern science – as “representations,” specifically in the sense of mental processes whereby one thing (a category, image) “replaces” or “stands for” another, in the service of thought as well as for purposes of expression or communication. It is quite obvious how the usual treatment of metaphor, particularly by linguists, would fall within this latter frame. And it is for this reason that ontological pluralists, like Ingold (see chapter 2), Viveiros de Castro (see especially Viveiros de Castro 2004, 13–16), and Descola, reject “metaphor” (implicitly including conventional metaphor) and by the same token anthropomorphism as well – as an inadequate or inaccurate way of comprehending non-Western conceptions of

358

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 359

relations between humans and, among other things, animals. Accordingly, pluralists, and most notably Viveiros de Castro in his development of a theoretical model called “perspectivism,” speak of non-Westerners not as “representing” animals in a certain way but, instead, of their conceiving of no essential difference between animals and people, and furthermore, of nonhuman animals as “seeing” themselves as people and humans as animals (Viveiros de Castro 2014, 56–7). In the same vein, pluralists reject the standard anthropological contrast of “nature” and “culture” (or “nature” and “society”), specifically as this has been applied in “naturalist” interpretations of various ethnographically documented “beliefs” or “representations” – that is, ways of speaking – and practices from which these might be inferred, as “cultural” or “social” constructions of a pre-existing “natural” reality. Rather, in animist ontology, Viveiros de Castro claims, one finds not “multiculturalism” coexisting with a single nature but instead “multinaturalism” combined with a single culture shared by humans and non-humans alike. As previously indicated (in chapter 2; see also Forth 2016; Forth 2018b), Nage ethnography provides very little evidence for ontological animism or for either of the other two “non-naturalist” ontologies (“totemism” and “analogism”) identified by Descola. This much should be sufficiently indicated by earlier remarks on how Nage view animals as lacking culture, but it might also be noted that, whereas animists are described as attributing “souls,” personhood, and human-like perspectives on the world to non-human animals, Nage hold no such views, at least not as generally accepted or widely held propositions. A possible exception to this is the apparently “analogistic” identity Nage posit between humans and water buffalo owned by spirits. But, as shown in chapter 2, this idea is meaningful specifically in the context of sacrificial ritual and has no bearing on, and cognitively exists quite separately from, the various ways Nage speak of, and evidently think about, buffalo in the numerous buffalo metaphors reviewed in chapter 3. In fact, most relations Nage maintain in respect to animals, both conceptual and practical, point to an attitude of naturalism. Nevertheless, I would not want to classify Nage as fully fledged or exclusive “naturalists,” mainly because the four models Descola proposes appear not to identify separate “ontologies” but, instead, formal differences among ideas relating to animals and other non-human entities that can be found in any society – a possibility Descola himself partly concedes when he allows for ontological “slippage” (as when Europeans treat “their cat as though it had a soul,” Descola 2013, 233–4).

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

359

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 360

On these grounds alone, one should not expect Nage animal metaphors to reveal any unitary or pervasive ontology significantly different from any equally monolithic philosophy presumed to underlie animal metaphors employed by European-speakers. As already demonstrated, Nage regard their metaphors as figurative usages, a view consistent with their concept of metaphor as “covering speech.” By the same token, ethnographic conversations failed to reveal any notion that a person spoken of as an animal, or an animal displaying a specific behaviour, is a temporary or permanent transformation of that animal; is somehow possessed by the animal’s spirit (an entity in any case not recognized by Nage); or by his or her characteristics or actions reveals himself or herself as somehow “participating” (as Lévy-Bruhl might have had it) in the nature, character, or essence of the animal. As explained in chapter 2, Nage identifying themselves as “god’s chickens” entails no notion of a spiritual connection between chickens and people, and certainly not any belief that chickens too have souls in any way identical to the souls of humans. Something of this sort may be suggested by the Cuna of Panama (Howe 1977), who regard animals as once having been human, like people, but as having subsequently changed, so that Cuna metaphors describing people as being like animals can be seen to turn partly on this primordial ontological unity. But nothing comparable can be found either in Nage mythology or in what they say about animals at present. In addition, the Cuna believe that despite their primordial identity humans and animals “long ago … became fully differentiated” (45n8, 139); hence, as Howe makes clear, rhetorical statements linking animals and humans at present (which, he notes, are given a public interpretation by Cuna orators) must be understood, like comparable Nage usages, as conventional metaphors. If animists are supposed to see a continuity between animals and humans, a categorical unity applying to all animals at all times, then Nage animal metaphors reveal no more than specific and partial continuities between individual humans and particular animals displayed in observable similarities that, moreover, pertain most often not to permanent traits of character or appearance but to ways people present themselves to others temporarily and contextually. (Again, this contrast equally applies to Nage conventional metaphors and their proposition – which in some theoretical frameworks could be construed as “metaphor” in an extended sense – that humans simultaneously exist as spirit buffalo.) Of course, ontological pluralists do not deny that the people whose implicit or explicit ideas they adduce in support

360

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 361

of their theoretical schemes recognize that all animals manifestly differ from humans in their physical forms or habits. Rather, what they posit for nonWestern “animists” is an ontological attitude presupposing, specifically, a continuity of essence between humans and all non-humans or, in Viveiros de Castro’s formulation, something like a single culture. In a similar way, Descola describes animists as recognizing a resemblance of “interiority” (or nonmaterial essence) between humans and animals coexisting with a difference of “exteriority,” or manifest physical form. By contrast, naturalism presents the opposite configuration, combining a difference of interiority (only humans have “culture” or “souls”) with an exterior, or physical, resemblance (both humans and animals are composed of flesh and blood, and in a modern view humans are “naturally” a kind of animal).4 In view of these distinctions, Descola’s formulation, especially, facilitates a further assessment of the possible ontological implications of Nage animal metaphors, although one that hardly favours the pluralists. Conventional metaphor in Nage, or for that matter in any other language, appears to entail the inverse of animism: for, as an analysis of individual metaphors has revealed, these typically deal in exterior resemblances, selecting and foregrounding specific perceptible morphological and behavioural similarities between a given kind of animal and a specific human individual (or, less often, a collection of individuals). This formulation, it hardly needs remarking, straightforwardly corresponds to Descola’s model of “naturalism,” the diametric opposite of his “animism.” So if Nage had to be slotted into one ontological box or another, their animal metaphors would provide further grounds for characterizing this small-scale non-Western society of cultivators and hunters as “naturalists.” But to make this case within a scheme like Descola’s, one would further need to show that nothing like conventional metaphor exists among animists – or at least that, insofar as usages like describing a person as a urinating dog might be employed by people classified as animists, their animistic users understand these expressions very differently. Although not explicitly addressing the concept of conventional metaphor, Descola (2013, 251) actually appears to make such a case when he asserts: “in animist societies there are no examples in which the relations between human beings are specified by expressions that denote relations among nonhumans” (emphasis added). Evidently, this would include relations between animals (e.g., Nage “monkey roasting a crayfish”) or between animals and inanimate objects (“Pit viper waiting for the stick”). An exception he allows are “rare

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

361

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 362

cases in which the two types of relations coincide perfectly because of the similarity of the actions that they involve” (ibid., emphasis added), exemplified by usages in which terms that “evoke the behaviour of predatory animals” are employed for (human) warfare. Despite the disparity between “perfect coincidence” and “similarity” in this statement, what Descola seems to be arguing is that, where animists do speak of human actions with terms referring to animal actions (those “rare cases”), the actions are essentially the same or similar and, therefore, are to be understood not as metaphors but as literal propositions (as would obtain, for example, when anglophones describe both humans and animals as “eating,” “sleeping,” “urinating,” and so on). A similar approach is evident in other passages. Descola (2013, 250) interprets animists as conceiving of relations between “non- humans” and between humans and non-humans on the “model of human society,” and as “qualifying” (apparently meaning “describing”) these relations with “categories borrowed from the field of relations between humans” (emphasis added). Responding to Ingold’s criticism of this position (summarized in chapter 2), Descola then asserts that this animist conception “does not in any sense stem from metaphorical projection” – and that it does not do so specifically because such an understanding, either the animists’ or his own, would “lead back to a distinction of nature and society that is alien to local practices” (ibid.). Rather, he declares, in animist societies “social categories serve simply as handy labels to characterize a relationship, regardless of the ontological status of the terms that it links together” (250–1). If “label” here simply substitutes for “metaphor” (apparently sometimes subsuming the “ontological metaphors” of linguists, see Kövecses 2010), earlier in his book Descola (2013, 10) makes the same use of “model” – as when he speaks of a “common model” enabling the use of “named categories” that “represent some relations between humans on the model of symbiotic relations between other species” (emphasis added). Evidently, then, animists do sometimes engage in “representation,” though it should perhaps be recalled that Descola claims that this sort of representation is “rarer” than is using terms for human relations to describe “interactions between nonhumans.” The impression conveyed by this tendentious argument is that animists cannot employ animal metaphors by definition, and that in those “rare” cases where they appear to do so, these are not metaphors at all but merely convenient ways of speaking – whatever might be made of this distinction. Con-

362

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 363

versely, it seems, when “naturists” express views that suggest animist thinking, these can only be understood as “poetic licence” and “metaphor,” as when a Euro-American ecologist’s argument that “non-humans” possess an “awareness of a future” (Leopold 1987)5 is dismissed by Descola (2013, 196) as “nothing but a metaphor for the general teleonomy of nature.” By this point readers should be able to judge for themselves whether or not Nage metaphors describing animal behaviours (including animal actions involving other animals, human beings, or objects), and for the most part referring to humans, are simply to be understood as “handy labels.” As the size of the corpus attests, such expressions are anything but rare. As already shown, there is no evidence to support an understanding of Nage conventional animal metaphors as reflecting or composing an “animist” ontology. Taking a more positive view, it may be recalled how Nage animal metaphors prospectively equate any human being with animals of most kinds recognized by Nage, so that properties of animals are spoken of and presumably thought about as resembling those of humans. However, not only is this observation virtually tautological, but it surely applies to metaphors in English and other Western languages as much as it does to Nage. Especially if we can imagine conventional metaphors as, at some level, not being understood figuratively (“yes, I really do mean that John [a greedy or slovenly person, perhaps, or a policeman] is a pig”), then one could perhaps construe such expressions as instances of animism everywhere. But notwithstanding the fact that the new animism of the ontological pluralists concerns an identification of nonhuman animals as humans more than an identification of humans as animals (though this too is surely implied), the point of course applies to animal metaphors in all languages and so cannot be adduced in support of any distinctive, pervasive ontology maintained by some humans but not by others. Some Final Remarks As discussed in chapter 2, while generally treated under the heading of “symbolism” conventional metaphors, including ones that employ animals as vehicles, are cognitively different from other ways of speaking about and, implicitly, thinking about the world that have been described as “symbolic.” As the Nage evidence confirms, conventional metaphors are recognized by their users as figurative expressions, usages that are consciously symbolic,

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

363

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 364

and it is principally in this respect that they differ from ideas that have been called “beliefs,” “cultural representations,” or, indeed, “metaphors” in a nonconventional, extended sense. While dismissing “metaphor” as a Western, “naturalist” construction that distorts non-Western realities, ontological pluralists have unfortunately failed to distinguish clearly between these two current (though unequal) acceptations of “metaphor.” Yet in a transparent attempt to explain away evidence weighing against his model of “animism,” Descola, despite some rather obscurantist wording, inadvertently reveals the presence of conventional animal metaphors in what, according to his own criteria, would appear to be the most “animist” of non-Western societies. And by so doing, he provides further support for the universal occurrence of this way of speaking and thinking, especially about humans but, implicitly, about animals as well. But were Descola (2013, 250) to acknowledge the distinction between, on the one hand, conventional metaphor (or metaphor in the usual sense of the term) as an essentially figurative and consciously symbolic kind of representation, and, on the other hand, what in one place he calls “unconscious metaphor,” his theory of ontological differences among humans could be strengthened. Indeed, he seems almost to do so when he speaks of what are evidently conventional metaphors as nothing more than “handy labels” – which must mean a way of speaking – or categories that are “borrowed,” a phrasing that surely recalls the notion of transfer central to the European concept of metaphor. At the same time, this evaluation entails treating such usages as unimportant, playing no real part in the social lives of their users, and furthermore as irrelevant to matters of epistemology or ontology. The regular use of well over five hundred animal metaphors by the Nage – a small-scale eastern Indonesian society that, in most respects, does not differ from the Amerindian and Siberian societies on which the ontological pluralists place their greatest reliance – shows how mistaken this approach can be.

364

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 365

Notes

cha p ter on e 1 Ana Wa is also the name of a Nage clan, but this is understood not as “animal” but as “People of the Wind,” and the clan is alternatively known as Wa (“Wind”), or woe Wa (woe is “clan”). 2 Comparing Dutch and Afrikaans animal metaphors, Dirven (1994) argues that sometimes the “image” of a European animal (e.g., the fox) has been transferred to a morphologically and behaviourally similar African animal (e.g., the jackal). He also notes that while “crow” is a metaphorical vehicle in both languages, the name actually refers to different corvid species in the two cases and, partly for this reason, has different interpretations when applied to humans. 3 In Forth 2004a I mostly refer to the usages as “similes.” I would now judge this to be an unwarranted over-generalization. cha p ter t wo 1 See Ngadha péle, glossed in part as “to seal, cut off, barricade, dam up, separate (from)” and “to conceal, protect, shelter”; and pata péle, translated as “allusion, metaphor, simile, proverb” (Arndt 1961). For Lio, Arndt (1933) lists péle as “to speak in metaphors or similes” as well as péle pata, an obvious variant of Nage pata péle, as a term for “metaphor” or “simile.” Curiously, several Nage thought péle was a word borrowed from Indonesian, and indeed

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 366

péle, possibly deriving from Ambonese Malay, can be heard in the Indonesian spoken by Nage. However, the occurrence of the word in dictionaries of Lio and Ngadha, the first compiled in the 1920s, removes any doubt that the word is indigenous to these languages, or at the very least that it preceded the colonial period on Flores. 2 Only during my most recent trip to Flores (in October 2018) did I realize that, when speaking Indonesian, Nage will sometimes refer to a metaphorical meaning as arising when a statement describing an animal is “taken, brought, conveyed” (bawa), or “pulled” (tarik) to humans or (less often) is “linked” (kait) with humans. The usage certainly suggests an understanding of metaphor as involving a connection as well as a separation between source and target domains. However, it is not an idiom indigenous to the Nage language, nor can I find any definite indication of it in Indonesian dictionaries. 3 Also unlike Evans-Pritchard, Willis (1974, 14–15) speaks of Nuer relations with wild animals as “metaphorical,” specifically animals described by Evans-Prichard (1956) as Nuer totems. 4 Interestingly, the metaphorical identification of humans as “god’s chickens” may suggest a connection with Nage metaphors in which “chicken” refers, metonymically, to wife-takers (Nos. 268, 276). Particularly relevant here is the similarity between the Nage term for “wife-giver,” moi ga’e, literally “lord [and] master,” and ga’e déwa, the usual term for “god,” as well as several respects in which the power of wife-givers over wife-takers, the former being conceived as essential to the creation of children and therefore as sources of life, is comparable to the power Nage view god as exercising over humans in general. By all indications, however, the notion of humans as “god’s chickens” stands on its own and is not motivated by any aspect of the Nage system of asymmetric marriage alliance. Nor is it likely that the identification of wifetakers with chickens, or, more specifically, the requirement that they provide chickens to wife-givers, derives from a conception of humans in general as chickens of god. ch ap ter thre e 1 Here translated as “journey,” wesa is a dialectal equivalent of central Nage zala, “path.” In central Nage wesa means “door, doorway.”

366

N O T E S T O PA G E S 3 6 – 8 5

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 367

cha p ter f ive 1 The foregoing corrects Forth (2004a, 185), where the expression was given incorrectly as edho bédho; also, contrary to what may be suggested in this earlier reference, the phrase does not necessarily complement piko ta’a wito io (No. 393). In the first instance I apparently mistook edo for edho “to pull out, up,” whereas bédho is a simple mistranscription. 2 In Forth (2004a, 185) bebe was transcribed incorrectly as bhebhe. 3 For the sake of comparison with the Nage list, I include “bat” in the English list but exclude “cock,” “hen,” and “rooster” since these are all covered by Nage manu (chicken or domestic fowl). Some of Palmatier’s interpretations are suspect. For example, it is not clear that “booby” as a reference to a fool or insane person derives from the identically named seabird, nor that the bird called jay is the source of “jaywalk.” Coincidentally, however, “jay” can mean “an impertinent chatterer,” “a flashy or absurdly dressed person,” or “a stupid or silly person,” while “gannet,” the name of a seabird not unlike a booby, further refers to “a greedy person” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary) – two usages that Palmatier, whose focus is American English, does not record. 4 “Binomial” is sometimes employed only for “productive binomials” – terms in which a second name specifies a subclass of the category denoted by the first, as in Nage kolo dhoro (Barred dove), naming a kind of kolo (small dove). In contrast, I use “binomial” to refer to any name that comprises two analyzable lexemes, including “unproductive” names like ie wea (mynah) and koko wodo (scrubfowl). With just six exceptions, all binomials included in the seventy-two Nage bird categories are unproductive, and of these three are employed as metaphors and three are not. ch a p ter si x 1 While still harvested in other parts of Flores, the fry are no longer caught in central Nage owing to the construction several decades ago of a dam on the river Ae Sésa, the main water course in which the fry of marine-breeding fish occurred (Forth 2016, 213–14, 221–2). 2 One might also count mépu, but this is regarded as a large kind of hiku (pit viper; Forth 2016, 186–8), thus a folk-specific category, and is therefore implicitly encompassed by the one Nage metaphor that employs the pit viper.

N O T E S T O PA G E S 2 6 2 – 7 6

367

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 368

3 This corrects my previous statement that there were seven frog metaphors (Forth 2016, 221), though this did not include “tadpole.” cha p ter seven 1 A motif regularly carved on parts of Nage houses and buildings of ritual significance is sometimes referred to as a “butterfly.” This, however, is not the name of the motif, which, unlike some other carving motifs, is usually described as nameless. And no one knew its significance – other than as a motif that has always been used. 2 I am grateful to John Acorn, a zoologist at the University of Alberta, for advice regarding the identification of this insect and also for alerting me to the phenomenon of “nectar robbing” (see No. 502). ch ap ter ei g ht 1 Intuitively, this figure may seem low. It largely reflects the fact that two porcupine and three civet folk-specifics as well as three rat generics are not specifically employed as metaphors. 2 European examples of such metaphors include “dog in the manger” and “nourishing a viper in one’s bosom,” both derived from Aesop’s fables. 3 Distinguishing by life form, the figure for mammals is 18 (8 domestic and 10 wild), for birds 22, for other non-mammalian vertebrates 7, and for invertebrates 10. With the partial exception of mammals, which account for over 42 percent of all metaphors, these totals correspond reasonably closely to the proportion of usages employing members of different life forms. 4 In a few instances Nage metaphors refer expressly to people as spirits. Thus, a handsome man can be called a “male spirit” (hoga nitu) while a person who does something in a contrary manner can be described as “like a nitu spirit who inverts things with ease” (Forth 1998, 65). In the first example, however, the expression is an unequivocal compliment, and it hardly needs remarking how the same meaning could not possibly be conveyed by “snake,” “eel,” or any other animal identified with nitu spirits. As for the second, various forms of inversion are for Nage such a definitive attribute of nitu that no other entity could metaphorically serve as well. Also worth mentioning is “spirit firearm” (bedi nitu), another spirit metaphor employed as the sole proper name of an insect, the Bombardier beetle. Nage similarly describe, but do not name,

368

N O T E S T O PA G E S 2 7 8 – 3 3 2

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 369

monitor lizards as “spirit coconut graters,” with reference to the shape of the lizard’s head; a kind of eel as a “spirit weaving sword”; and referring to its speed, the bronzeback snake (No. 434) as a “spirit blowgun.” But while all these usages can be understood as metaphors – in fact Nage describe them as no more than “ways of speaking” (Forth 2016, 244) – they are obviously not animal metaphors. cha p ter n i ne 1 For another eastern Indonesian example of this principle, see Onvlee (1983) on house construction on Sumba. 2 Another seventeenth-century philosopher, Ralph Cudworth, also advanced a radically contrary position, arguing not only that animals have thoughts and feelings but that, like humans, they also have souls (Harrison 1998; see also Passmore 1951, 24–5, 28). Interestingly, the Nage concept of mae (“soul”), corresponding in many respects to the Christian concept, is not something Nage ordinarily attribute to animals. 3 All these examples, and others that could be cited, are drawn from Palmatier (1993). The same point could of course be made with reference to non-animal metaphors, for example “the pot calling the kettle black.” 4 Descola argues that naturalism has deep roots in Western history. This is not the place to consider how far the modern or “scientific” view of humans and animals is in fact continuous with pre-scientific, Christian views, but I would just mention 1 Corinthians 15:39, where it is stated that “All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.” Surely this suggests that humans and animals do not possess the same “exteriority.” What is more, opinion on whether or not animals have souls appears to have varied considerably over the ages, both among churchmen and philosophers. 5 Descola erroneously cites the original publication date as 1947 and, in his bibliography, lists a 1985 edition. The correct dates are the ones I give here. Leopold’s book was most recently republished in 2013.

N O T E S T O PA G E S 3 4 9 – 6 3

369

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 370

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 371

References

Ammer, C. 1989. It’s Raining Cats and Dogs … and Other Beastly Expressions. New York: Dell Publishing. Arndt, Paul. 1933. Li’onesisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch. Ende-Flores: ArnoldusDruckerei. – 1961. Wörterbuch der Ngadhasprache. Studia Instituti Anthropos, 15. Posieux, Fribourg, Suisse: Anthropos-Institut. Bader, H. 1971. “Der Regenbogen in der Auffassung der Florinesen.” Anthropos 66: 947–77. Barnes, R.H. 1973. “The Rainbow in the Representations of Inhabitants of the Flores Area of Indonesia.” Anthropos 68: 611–13. Berlin, Brent. 1992. Ethnobiological Classification: Principles of Categorization of Plants and Animals in Traditional Societies. Princeton, nj: Princeton University Press. Bird-David, Nurit. 1999. “‘Animism’ Revisited: Personhood, Environment, and Relational Epistemology.” Current Anthropology 40, Supplement: S67–S79. Black, Max. 1962. Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca, ny: Cornell University Press. Blust, Robert, and Stephen Trussel. 2010–ongoing. The Comparative Austronesian Dictionary. www.trussel2.com/ACD. Boyer, P. 1994. The Naturalness of Religious Ideas: A Cognitive Theory of Religion. Berkeley: University of California Press. Coates, Brian J., and K. David Bishop. 1997. A Guide to the Birds of Wallacea: Sulawesi, the Moluccas and Lesser Sunda Islands. Alderley, au: Dove Publications.

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 372

Cochetti, Stefano. 1995. “The Dogon Sacrifice as a Literal Metaphor.” Paragrana 4 (2): 144–50. Crocker, J. Christopher. 1977a. “My Brother the Parrot.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 164–92. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. – 1977b. “The Social Functions of Rhetorical Forms.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 33–66. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. D’Andrade, Roy G. 1995. The Development of Cognitive Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Darwin, Charles. 1872. The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. London: John Murray. Descola, Philipe. 2013 [2005]. Beyond Nature and Culture. Translated from the French by Janet Lloyd. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Dirven, René. 1994. Metaphor and Nation: Metaphors Afrikaners Live By. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Echols, John M. and Hassan Shadily. 1989. An Indonesian-English Dictionary. 3rd ed. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Eco, Umberto. 2003. Mouse or Rat? Translation as Negotiation. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Evans-Pritchard, E.E. 1940. The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Oxford: Clarendon Press. – 1956. Nuer Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fernandez, James W. 1986. Persuasions and Performances: The Play of Tropes in Culture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Forth, Gregory. 1981. Rindi: An Ethnographic Study of a Traditional Domain in Eastern Sumba. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. – 1988. “Apes and Dugongs: Common Mythological Themes in Diverse Southeast Asian Communities.” Contributions to Southeast Asian Ethnography 7: 189–229. – 1989. “Animals, Witches and Wind: Eastern Indonesian Variations on the ‘Thunder Complex.’” Anthropos 84: 89–106. – 1991. “Nage Directions: An Eastern Indonesian System of Spatial Orientation.” In Social Space, ed. O. Grøn, E. Engelstad, and I. Lindblom, 138–48. Odense: Odense University Press. – 1992. “The Pigeon and the Friarbird: The Mythical Origin of Death and Daylight in Eastern Indonesia.” Anthropos 87: 423–41. – 1993 “Social and Symbolic Aspects of the Witch among the Nage of Eastern Indone-

372

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 373

sia.” In Understanding Witchcraft and Sorcery in Southeast Asia, ed. C.W. Watson and R.F. Ellen, 99–122. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. – 1994 “‘Post’ Modernism: Issues of Meaning, Cultural Objectification and NationalLocal Distinctions in an Eastern Indonesian Community.” In Official Rhetoric, Popular Response: Dialogue and Resistance in Indonesia and the Philippines, ed. J. Nourse and G. Acciaioli, 144–56. Special issue of Social Analysis 35. – 1998. Beneath the Volcano: Religion, Cosmology and Spirit Classification among the Nage of Eastern Indonesia. Leiden: kitlv Press – 2000. “Eastern Sumbanese Bird Classification.” Journal of Ethnobiology 20 (2): 161–92. – 2004a. Nage Birds: Classification and Symbolism among an Eastern Indonesian People. London: Routledge. – 2004b. “Public Affairs: Institutionalized Non-Marital Sex in an Eastern Indonesian Society.” Bijdragen tot de Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde 160 (2/3): 315–38. – 2004c. “A ‘Cock’ and ‘Bull’ Story: Nage Sex Terms and Their Implications for Ethnozoological Classification.” Anthropological Linguistics 46 (4): 427–49. – 2005. “The Diatribe of ‘Ajo Bupu and the Oration of Lowa Bata: Examples of Parallelistic Speaking among the Nage of Central Flores (Indonesia).” Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 6 (1): 35–56. – 2006. “Words for ‘Bird’ in Eastern Indonesia.” Journal of Ethnobiology 26 (2): 177–207. – 2007a. “Can Animals Break Taboos? Applications of ‘Taboo’ among the Nage of Eastern Indonesia.” Oceania 77 (2): 215–31. – 2007b. “Pigeon and Friarbird Revisited: A Further Analysis of an Eastern Indonesian Mythico-Ornithological Contrast.” Anthropos 102: 495–513. – 2007c. “Transformation and Replacement: A Comparison of Some Indonesian Bird Myths.” In Pika-Pika: The Flashing Firefly: Essays to Honour the Life of Pauline Hetland Walker (1938–2005), ed. Anthony R. Walker, 359–77. Delhi: Hindustan Publishing Corporation. – 2008. Images of the Wildman in Southeast Asia: An Anthropological Perspective. London: Routledge (paperback edition 2012). – 2009a. “Tree Totems and the Tamarind People: Implications of Clan Plant Taboos in Central Flores.” Oceania 79: 263–79. – 2009b. “Symbolic Birds and Ironic Bats: Varieties of Classification in Nage Folk Ornithology.” Ethnology 48 (2): 139–59. – 2009c. “Separating the Dead: The Ritual Transformation of Affinal Exchange in Central Flores.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.) 15: 557–74.

REFERENCES

373

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 374

– 2011. “Charcoal, Eggplants, and Small Hairy Hominoids: Dietary and Behavioural Components of a ‘Wildman’ Image from West Central Flores (Indonesia).” Anthropos 106: 57–68. – 2012a. “Marking-Reversals and Their Relevance for Prehistory: An Eastern Indonesian Case.” Oceanic Linguistics 51 (2): 456–69. – 2012b. “Of Mice and Rats: The Place of Murids in Nage Animal Classification and Symbolism.” Journal of Ethnobiology 32 (1): 50–72. – 2013. “Symbolic Lizards: An Exploration of Forms of Special Purpose Classification of Animals among the Nage of Eastern Indonesia.” Anthrozoös 26 (3): 357–72. – 2015. “Lumpers, Splitters, and Other Variations in Nage Animal Classification.” Journal of Ethnobiology 35 (2): 386–407. – 2016. Why the Porcupine Is Not a Bird: Explorations in the Folk Zoology of an Eastern Indonesian People. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. – 2017a. “What a Little Bird Tells Us about Symbolic Thought: The Russett-Capped Stubtail (Tesia everetti) in Nage Augury, Myth, and Metaphor.” Journal of Ethnobiology 37 (4): 689–99. – 2017b. “Cryptids, Classification, and Categories of Cats: An Ethnozoological Study of Unidentified Felids from Eastern Indonesia.” In Anthropology and Cryptozoology, ed. Samantha Hurn, 32–53. London: Routledge. – 2017c. “Ethnographic Reports of Freshwater Turtles on Flores Island: The Possibilities of an Undocumented Chelonian Species.” Herpetological Review 48 (2): 304–10. – 2018a. “Elderly People Growing Tails: The Constitution of a Non-Empirical Idea.” Current Anthropology 15 (4): 397–414. – 2018b. “‘Living’ in Nage, or the Meaning of ‘Life’ in an Eastern Indonesian Society.” Oceania 88 (2): 168–82. – 2018c. “Sex Differentiable Terms in Languages of Flores Island: A Comparative Review.” Oceanic Linguistics 57 (1): 101–22. – 2018d. “Further Evidence for Undocumented Freshwater Turtles on Flores Island, Indonesia.” Herpetological Review 49 (1): 19–21. Forth, Gregory, and Svitlana Kukharenko. 2012. “Animals Crossing: Analytical Observations on a Cross-Culturally Ubiquitous Mortuary Belief.” Folkore 123 (2): 152–78. Fox, James J. 1971. “Sister’s Child as Plant: Metaphors in an Idiom of Consanguinity.” In Rethinking Kinship and Marriage, ed. Rodney Needham, 219–52. London: Tavistock. Franklyn, Julian. 1975. A Dictionary of Rhyming Slang. 2nd ed. [first 1960]. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

374

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 375

Geertz, Clifford. 1972. “Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight.” In The Interpretation of Cultures, 412–53. New York: Basic Books (Originally published in Daedalus 101 [1972]: 1–37). Glucksberg, Sam, and Boaz Keysar. 1993. “How Metaphors Work.” In Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed., ed. Andrew Ortony, 401–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Goatly, Andrew. 2006. “Humans, Animals, and Metaphors.” Society and Animals 14 (1): 15–37. Gudeman, Stephen. 1986. Economics as Culture: Models and Metaphors of Livelihood. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Hammersley, Martyn, and Paul Atkinson. 2007. Ethnography: Principles in Practice. 3rd ed. London: Routledge. Harrison, Peter. 1998. “The Virtues of Animals in Seventeenth-Century Thought.” Journal of the History of Ideas 59 (3): 463–84. Harvey, Graham. 2006. Animism: Respecting the Living World. New York: Columbia University Press. Holbraad, Martin and Morten Axel Pederson. 2017. The Ontological Turn: An Anthropological Exposition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Howe, James. 1977. “Carrying the Village: Cuna Political Metaphors.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 132–63. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Hunn, Eugene S. 1999. “Size as Limiting the Recognition of Biodiversity in Folkbiological Classifications: One of Four Factors Governing the Cultural Recognition of Biological Taxa.” In Folkbiology, ed. Douglas L. Medin and Scott Atran, 47–69. Cambridge, ma: mit Press. – 2011. “Ethnozoology.” In Ethnobiology, ed. Eugene N. Anderson, Deborah Pearsall, and Eugene S. Hunn, 83–95. Hoboken, nj: Wiley Blackwell. Hurn, Samantha. 2012. Humans and Other Animals: Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Human-Animal Interactions. London: Pluto Press. Hutchinson, Sharon E. 1996. Nuer Dilemmas: Coping with Money, War, and the State. Berkeley: University of California Press. Ingold, Tim. 2011. The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. London: Routledge. – 2016. “End Comment: To Conclude in the Spirit of Rebirth, or a Note on Animic Anthropo-ontogenesis.” In Animism in Southeast Asia, ed. K. Århem and G. Sprenger, 302–9. London: Routledge. Irwin, Rebecca E., Judith L. Bronstein, Jessamyn S. Manson, and Leif Richardson.

REFERENCES

375

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 376

2010. “Nectar Robbing: Ecological and Evolutionary Perspectives.” Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 41: 271–92. Jackson, Michael. 1996. “Introduction: Phenomenology, Radical Empiricism, and Anthropological Critique.” In Things as They Are: New Directions in Phenomenological Anthropology, ed. M. Jackson, 1–50. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Jakobson, R., and M. Halle. 1956. Fundamentals of Language. The Hague: Mouton. Jones, Ernest. 1948. Papers on Psycho-analysis. 5th ed. London: Bailliere, Tindall and Cox. Keesing, Roger. 1985. “Conventional Metaphors and Anthropological Metaphysics: The Problematic of Cultural Translation.” Journal of Anthropological Research 41: 201–17. Kövecses, Zoltán. 2010. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Larson, Helen, K. 2011. “Systematics of the Rhyacichthyidae.” In The Biology of Gobies, ed. R.A. Patzner, James L. Van Tassell, Marcelo Kovacic, and B.G. Kapoor, 51–60. New York: crc Press, New York. Lawrence, Elizabeth. 1993. “The Sacred Bee, the Filthy Pig, and the Bat out of Hell: Animal Symbolism as Cognitive Biophilia.” Biophilia Hypothesis, ed. Stephen R. Kellert and Edward O. Wilson, 301–41. Washington, dc: The Island Press. Leach, E.R. 1976. Culture and Communication: The Logic by Which Symbols Are Connected. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leopold, Aldo. 1987 [1949]. A Sand County Almanach: And Sketches Here and There. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1963. Totemism. Boston: Beacon Press. Levin, Samuel R. 1993. “Language, Concepts, and Worlds: Three Domains of Metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought, ed. Andrew Ortony, 112–23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Liebow, Elliot. 1967. Tally’s Corner: A Study of Negro Streetcorner Men. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company. Mathijsen, A. 1906. Tettum-Hollandsce woordenlijst, met beknopte spraakkunst. Verhandelingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen. Vol. 56 (2).

376

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 377

Midgley, Mary. 2002 Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature. London: Routledge. Miller, George A. 1993. “Images and Models, Similes and Metaphors.” In Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed. Ed. Andrew Ortony, 357–400. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Morgan, Jerry L. 1993. “Observations on the Pragmatics of Metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed., ed. Andrew Ortony, 124–34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Needham, Rodney. 1972. Belief, Language, and Experience. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Ohnuki-Tierney, Emiko. 1987. The Monkey as Mirror: Symbolic Transformations in Japanese History and Ritual. Princeton, nj: Princeton University Press. Olatéju, Adésola. 2005. “The Yorùbá Animal Metaphors: Analysis and Interpretation.” Nordic Journal of African Studies 14 (3): 368–83. Onvlee, Louis. 1983. “The Construction of the Dam in Mangili: Notes on the Social Organization of Eastern Sumba.” In Structural Anthropology in the Netherlands, ed. P.E. de Josselin de Jong, 150–63. Dordrecht, nl: Springer. – 1984. Kamberaas (Oost-Soembaas)-Nederlands woordenbook. Dordrecht, nl: Foris Publications. Ortony, Andrew. 1993. “The Role of Similarity in Similes and Metaphors.” In Metaphor and Thought, ed. Andrew Ortony, 342–56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Palmatier, R. 1995. Speaking of Animals: A Dictionary of Animal Metaphors. Westport, ct: Greenwood Press. Pareira, M. Mandalangi, and E. Douglas Lewis. 1998. Kamus Sara Sikka Bahasa Indonesia. Ende, Flores: Penerbit Nusa Indah. – n.d. Kamus Bahasa Indonesia-Sara Sikka An Indonesian – Sikkanese Dictionary oleh Edmundus Pareira and E. D. Lewis. Privately published. Passmore, J.A. 1951. Ralph Cudworth: An Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Peirce, C.S. 1930–35. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Ed. C. Harteshorne and P. Weiss. Cambridge, ma: Harvard University Press. Radcliffe-Brown, A.R. 1951. “The Comparative Method in Social Anthropology.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 81: 15–22. Richards, I.A. 1936. The Philosophy of Rhetoric. London: Oxford University Press. Rosaldo, Michelle Z. 1980. Knowledge and Passion: Ilongot Notions of Self and Social Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Salvucci, D.D., and N.A. Taatgen. 2011. The Multitasking Mind. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

REFERENCES

377

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 378

Sandor, Andras. 1986. “Metaphor and Belief.” Journal of Anthropological Research 42 (2): 101–22. Sapir, J.D. 1977. “The Anatomy of Metaphor.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 3–32. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Simpson, K., and N. Day. 1993. Field Guide to the Birds of Australia. 4th ed. Ringwood, au: Viking O’Neil, Penguin Books Australia Ltd. Sommer, Robert, and Barbara A. Sommer. 2011. “Zoomorphy: Animals Metaphors for Human Personality.” Anthrozoös 24 (3): 237–48. Sperber, Dan. 1975. Rethinking Symbolism. Translated from the French by Alice L. Morton. Cambridge, uk: Cambridge University Press. Tambiah, S.J. 1969. “Animals are Good to Think and Good to Prohibit.” Ethnology 8 (4): 423–59. Tule, Philipus. 1998. Keonese-Indonesian-English Dictionary. Privately published. Turner, Terence. 1991. “‘We Are Parrots,’ ‘Twins Are Birds’: Play of Tropes as Operational Structure.” In Beyond Metaphor: The Theory of Tropes in Anthropology, ed. James W. Fernandez, 121–58. Stanford, ca: Stanford University Press. Turner, Victor. 1967. The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual. Ithaca, ny: Cornell University of Press. Tylor, E.B. 1866. “The Religion of Savages.” Fortnightly Review 6: 71–86. – 1958 [1871]. Primitive Culture, Vol. 2. New York: Harper and Row. Urban, Greg. 1996. Metaphysical Community: The Interplay of the Senses and the Intellect. Austin: University of Texas Press. Urton, Gary, ed. 1985. Animal Myths and Metaphors in South America. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Valeri, Valerio. 2000. The Forest of Taboos: Morality, Hunting, and Identity among the Huaulu of the Moluccas. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Van den Bergh, G.D., H.J.M. Meijer, Rokus Awe Due, M.J. Morwood, K. Szabo, L.W. van den Hoek Ostende, T. Sutikna, E.W. Saptomo, P.J. Piper, and K.M. Dobney. 2009. “The Liang Bua Faunal Remains: A 9.5. k.yr. Sequence from Flores, East Indonesia.” Journal of Human Evolution 57: 527–37. Van Suchtelen, B.C.C.M.M. 1919–21. Endeh (Flores). Mededeelingen van het Bureau voor de Bestuurszaken der Buitengewesten, bewerkt door het Encylopaedisch Bureau, Aflevering 26. Weltevreden: Papyrus. Verheijen, Jilis A.J. 1990. Dictionary of Plant Names in the Lesser Sunda Islands. Pacific Linguistics Series D, 83. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies.

378

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 379

Viveiros de Castro. E. 1998. “Cosmological Deixis and Amerindian Perspectivism.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.) 4: 469–88. – 2004. “Perspectival Anthropology and the Method of Controlled Equivocation.” Tipiti 2 (1): 3–22. – 2014 [2009]. Cannibal Metaphysics: For a Post-Structural Anthropology. Translated from the French by Peter Skafish. Minneapolis: Univocal. Wagner, Roy. 1986. Symbols That Stand for Themselves. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. West, Harry G. 2007. Ethnographic Sorcery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Willis, Roy. 1974. Man and Beast. New York: Basic Books. Wurm, S.A., and Shiro Hattori, eds. 1981. Language Atlas of the Pacific Area. Canberra: Australian Academy of the Humanities in collaboration with the Japan Academy.

REFERENCES

379

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 380

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 381

Index

Acorn, John, 368n2 Aesop’s fables, 60, 131, 368n2 (ch. 8) affinal alliance, asymmetric marriage alliance, 4, 110, 173, 176, 345, 346, 366n4. See also bridewealth; marriage; wifegivers and wife-takers Afrikaans, 355, 365n2 Ammer, C., 85, 141, 181–2 analogy, 16, 19, 20, 39, 40, 43–4, 45, 49, 111, 134, 176, 246; external and internal, 20, 43–4 ancestors, 59, 169–70, 292 animal, animals: Nage term for “animal,” 8, 365n1 (ch. 1); Nage concept of, 8, 53, 331, 332, 333–5; prominence in metaphors, 3, 27, 313; size of animals affecting metaphorical prominence, 160, 304, 309, 313, 315, 351 animism, 12, 28–9, 46, 51–22, 271, 354, 355, 358–63, 364 anthropomorphism, 356–7, 358 ants, 42, 172, 220, 254–5, 266, 280, 283, 285–8, 300, 309, 319, 351 arachnids. See invertebrates; scorpions; spiders Arenga palm, 75, 106, 122, 143, 234–5, 319. See also toddy Aristotle, 18 Arndt, P., 89, 133, 296, 365n1 (ch. 2) augury, 3, 161, 169, 183, 205. See also omens

Bahasa Indonesia. See Indonesian national language Bali, Balinese, 41, 42, 17; Balinese cows, cattle, 78–9, 80 bats, 143, 162–5, 282, 311, 313, 315, 316, 317 bedbugs, 291, 298–9, 310, 319 bees, 39, 280, 284, 288–9, 291, 350 beetles, 10, 74, 281, 291–4, 300, 309, 317, 318, 320, 321, 348, 350, 368n4 belief: contrasting to metaphor, 28, 40, 41, 48, 49–52, 54, 55, 67, 143, 162, 190, 213, 229, 257, 291, 320–4, 330, 331–2 Berlin, B., 327 betel and areca (nut), 58, 181, 197, 218–19 binary composites, 11, 53, 58, 87, 91–2, 97, 122, 127, 145, 170, 226–7, 230, 231, 285, 298, 302, 328–9 birds, 20, 40, 43, 46, 126, 148, 279, 284, 309, 310–11, 323, 368n3 (ch. 8), 369n4; bird metaphors, 53, 120, 161–242, 287, 310, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 320, 321, 324, 326, 329, 337, 341–2; category of “bird,” 162; witch birds, 192, 194, 221, 225, 324 birds of prey, 190, 194, 210, 216, 219, 221, 225, 316, 323. See also eagles; owls Bororo, 6, 40, 41, 42–6, 343 Boyer, P., 18–19 bridewealth, 4, 32, 48, 54, 58–9, 62, 63, 68, 77, 78, 80, 83, 85, 92, 103, 169, 174, 178, 181, 185, 287, 320, 324, 325, 328, 347

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 382

buffalo (water buffalo), 4, 16, 19–20, 26, 54–67, 68, 69, 78, 82, 84, 85, 90, 91, 94, 96, 111, 117, 130, 146, 159–60, 163, 164, 184, 185, 186, 232, 287, 314, 315, 318, 326, 328, 331, 339, 340, 342, 346, 348, 349, 350, 359; human identification with, 45–8, 49, 50, 55, 220, 323–4, 332, 359, 360 bugs: true bugs, 294–5. See also invertebrates bushchat (bird), 161, 165–6, 241, 329 bushlark (bird), 166 butterflies, 279, 324, 368n1 (ch. 7) carving, 261, 275, 368n1 (ch. 7) Catholicism. See Christianity cats, 11, 53, 91, 92, 97, 112, 113–21, 143, 145, 146, 148, 160, 177, 313, 315, 318, 337, 339– 41, 342, 344, 346, 347, 350, 352, 359; ngo ngoe (kind of wild cat), 54, 114, 119, 279, 310, 327, 334 cattle, 54, 55, 78–9, 80, 81, 96, 160, 315, 340; among the Nuer, 40–1, 42, 64 centipedes, 298, 306, 308 Chestnut-backed thrush, 242 chickens, 15–16, 40, 64, 65, 105, 117, 159, 169–86, 187, 195, 205, 214, 218, 221, 225, 229, 240, 293, 310, 312, 314, 315, 319, 323, 326, 337, 344, 347, 350, 351, 369n3; god’s chickens (chickens of god), human beings as, 18, 43–4, 45, 46–7, 49, 51, 172, 342, 360, 366n4 children: metaphors referring to, 8, 81, 85, 90, 94, 98, 104, 105, 114, 138, 146, 152, 157, 166, 205, 236, 245, 263, 264, 280, 282, 291, 294, 295, 298, 302, 316–17, 342, 351, 366n4 Christianity, 4, 50, 77, 172, 201, 225–6, 270, 369n2, 369n4 chronological signs: metaphors referring to, 101, 167, 168, 202, 206–7, 222, 239, 316, 320, 324, 325, 326 circle-dancing, 31, 92, 106, 130, 187, 217, 259–60, 266, 308 civet (Palm civet), xii, 81, 92, 114, 116, 142– 7, 160, 312, 315, 317, 318, 319, 321, 329, 337, 340, 347, 350, 351, 352, 368n1 (ch. 8) cockatoos, 147, 167, 169, 186–9, 190, 192, 209, 221, 241, 275, 329, 338, 348, 349

382

cock-fighting, 173; in Bali, 41, 42, 47 cockroaches, 247, 295–7, 319, 347, 349 cognitivism: cognitive aspects of metaphor and symbolism, 18–19, 47, 49–51, 321, 331, 335, 359, 363 composite terms, expressions. See binary composites conventional metaphor. See metaphor crabs. See crustaceans crickets. See grasshoppers Crocker, J.C., 40, 41, 42, 43–4 crocodiles, 12, 243, 244, 272–5, 313, 319, 341, 345, 347 crow, 167, 187, 188–9, 190–1, 209, 222, 225, 316, 324, 348, 355, 365n2; Flores crow, 190, 324 crustaceans, 111, 150, 152, 265, 302–6, 309, 316, 322, 357 cuckoos, 174, 190, 236; channel-billed cuckoo, 167–8, 187, 222, 241, 315, 316, 348; koel, 167, 168–9, 187, 222, 241, 315, 316, 348 cuckoo-shrike, 191, 210, 323 Cudworth, R., 369n2 Cuna, 35, 360; concept of metaphor, 35 Darwin, C., 50, 354 Deane, Shelbra, 45 deer, 69, 79, 83, 89, 92, 100, 108, 113, 122–6, 160, 234, 263, 312, 313, 315, 316, 326, 328, 340, 341 Descartes, R., 354, 358 Descola, P., 28, 46, 52, 358, 359, 361–3, 364, 369nn4–5 Dhawe (region), 266 Dirven, R., 13, 365n2 dogs, xi, xii, 9, 11, 14, 19–20, 33, 38–9, 40, 45, 53, 58–9, 65, 74–5, 83, 84, 86–7, 91–103, 105, 108, 112, 114, 116, 119, 127, 130, 144, 146, 148, 154–5, 158, 159, 160, 272, 297, 326, 328, 331, 339, 340, 342, 344, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 350, 351, 355, 356, 357, 361; dog in the manger (English metaphor), 48, 60, 368n2 (ch. 8); Nage dogs, men as, 18, 45, 47, 100, 342, 345; sky dog, 10, 239 dollarbird, 192, 241, 344 dolphins, 10, 38, 263, 273, 278, 316, 346

INDEX

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 383

domestic fowls, 12, 44, 201, 209, 321. See also chickens domestic/wild contrast, 26–7, 48, 53, 85, 96, 103, 110, 113–14, 159–60, 312–13, 314– 15, 325, 326, 327, 340, 368n3 (ch. 8) doves. See pigeons and doves drongo (bird), 192–3, 202, 204, 225, 316, 324, 349 dugong, 264 Dutch, 260; language, 4, 30, 34, 355, 365n2 eagles, 194–5, 210, 225, 241, 313, 314. See also birds of prey earthquake, 291–2, 321, 350 earthworms, 306–7, 319, 322, 349 Ebu Lobo volcano, 68, 86, 88, 149, 240, 273, 300 economy, economic activities, 4, 347–9. See also hunting; rice cultivation eels, 214, 265, 267–8, 302, 322, 323, 331, 368– 9n4 Endenese, 25, 120, 248, 308 English: English animal metaphors, xi–xii, xiii, 3, 7–8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 23, 45, 48, 50, 57, 60, 61, 63, 68, 72, 74, 80, 81, 85, 86, 88, 91, 96, 97, 99, 100, 103, 104, 105, 106, 109–10, 118, 119, 123, 131, 137, 139, 141, 142, 149, 152, 154, 162, 164, 166, 169, 174, 175, 179, 180, 181–2, 187, 194, 195, 209, 211, 214, 217, 220, 221, 236, 239, 240–1, 243–4, 245, 246, 247, 249, 251, 256, 262, 267, 270, 276, 279, 280, 281, 288, 290, 291, 298, 300, 303, 308–9, 311, 337, 343, 357, 363, 367n3; English metaphoric names for animals, 314, 334; for knots, 146; for plants, 64, 120 etu. See pugilistic competitions Evans-Pritchard, E.E., 40–1, 42, 49, 64, 172, 366n3 faeces: animal faeces (defecation, droppings) in metaphor, 56–7, 82, 84, 104, 108, 116, 130, 143, 163, 197, 280, 317, 319, 350 fantail (bird), 198–200, 206, 223, 338, 349 finches, 162, 196–7, 314 fireflies, 292

INDEX

fish, 10, 25, 120, 154, 223, 243–4, 261, 262–7, 277–8, 279, 287, 309, 311, 314, 315, 321, 322, 323, 339, 341, 345, 351, 367n1 (ch. 6), 369n4; crayfish (see crustaceans); fish fry, 156, 243, 266, 278, 287, 306, 329, 351, 357, 367n1 (ch. 6); gobies, 10, 243, 261, 264–5, 315, 345; shark, 263–4, 278, 314. See also dolphins; eels; shellfish fleas: dog fleas, 291, 298–9 flies and mosquitoes, 280, 289–91, 298, 317, 318, 319, 349 Flores (Island), 3–4, 72, 80–1, 114, 117, 129, 130, 142, 152, 158, 226, 229, 236, 243, 261, 264, 275, 305, 365–6n1, 367n1 (ch. 6); animals’ introductions to, 68, 83, 91, 113, 122, 126, 146, 315; languages of, 4, 9, 34, 120, 125, 212 Flores giant rat. See Giant rats Flores green pigeon. See pigeons and doves flying foxes. See bats folk-generics, 10, 26, 53, 132, 162, 240, 241, 243, 279, 309, 310, 314, 326–7, 328; defined, 10; monomial naming of, 327; prominence in metaphor, 9–10, 26 folk-intermediates, 132, 162, 226, 316, 328; defined, 132 folk-specifics, 10, 54, 138, 162, 241, 243, 279, 310, 327, 367n2 (ch. 6), 368n1; defined, 10 friarbird, 11, 123, 166, 186, 193, 201–7, 213, 223, 234–5, 312, 313, 314, 321, 349, 351, 357 frogs, 64, 150, 243, 268–72, 278, 303, 308, 313, 314, 315, 317, 318–19, 321, 341, 346, 349, 350, 368n3 fruit-dove. See pigeons and doves games, 177, 260; children’s games, 126, 138, 292–3, 269, 294, 320; gambling games, 63. See also pugilistic competitions geckoes. See lizards: Tokay geckoes Geertz, C., 41 gender, 181, 208–9, 217, 334, 342, 343–5 Geo, Géro (region), 60, 116–17, 130, 231, 257, 342, 352 Giant rats, 48, 92, 127, 130–2, 133, 134–5, 153, 160, 312, 315, 316, 318, 328, 340, 342, 344, 348, 349, 357

383

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 384

goats, 9, 57, 80, 82, 83–90, 94, 108, 125, 144, 160, 163, 173, 315, 318, 328, 340, 342, 346, 347, 350, 351 goshawk. See birds of prey grasshoppers, 172, 267, 279, 280–2, 293, 309, 317, 319 ground-dove. See pigeons and doves grubs. See insect larvae hawk-owl. See owls herons and egrets, 211–12, 237, 313; nightheron, 101 hominoids: legendary hominoids, 237 homonymy: in motivation of metaphors, 166, 239, 329 house: as a metaphor, 60–1, 136–7, 301, 346–7 Howe, J., 35, 360 Huaulu, 40 human-animal contrast, xii, 6, 8–9, 18, 27, 30, 335, 358–61 humans: human referents of animal metaphors, 336–52; human body parts as referents, 10, 11, 26, 293, 338, 342; human physical features as referents, 146, 338, 344; human body parts as names of animals, 11 humour, xii, 73, 113, 353–4 Hunn, E., 313 hunting, xi, 4, 13, 29, 54, 75, 100, 107–8, 110, 126, 130, 132, 142, 154, 210, 214, 255, 266, 270, 292, 320, 324, 361; annual ritual hunt, 68, 69–70, 113, 122–3, 292, 295; hunting dogs, 75, 91, 98–9, 100, 272 huts: animal metaphors in naming of, 67, 103, 186 hyperbole, 6, 19, 123, 184, 255 Ilongot: concept of metaphor, 35, 41 Imperial pigeon. See pigeons and doves Indonesian national language, 4, 21, 30, 33, 34; metaphors in, 25, 89, 101, 117, 121, 124, 220, 266–7, 269, 286; terms for metaphor, 30. See also MalayoPolynesian languages Ingold, T., 28–30, 358, 362

384

insect larvae, 300–1, 309, 317, 350 insects. See invertebrates interpretation (of metaphor), xii, 14, 21–4, 30, 33, 35, 43–4, 51, 306, 316, 320, 353, 360, 365n2 invertebrates, 26, 258, 279–309, 310, 311, 312, 314, 315, 317, 321, 323, 325, 326, 329, 332, 336, 339, 341, 368n3 (ch. 8) irony, 6, 43, 126, 212 Jakobson, R., 6, 30, 37, 39, 41, 334 junglefowl, 128, 211, 214–16, 226, 227, 323, 337, 344, 346, 351 Kebi, 82, 86, 328, 342 Keesing, R., 41 Keo, 90, 110, 114, 133, 164, 196, 253, 257, 263, 290, 305 kestrel. See birds of prey kite. See birds of prey koel. See cuckoos Kövecses, Z., 7, 14 Labo (region), 60, 92, 98, 347 Lamaholot, 125 Latin, 36, 86, 101, 134 Lévi-Strauss, C., 9, 37–8, 40, 43, 334–5, 356 Lévy-Bruhl, L., 360 life forms, life form taxa, 25, 26, 53, 243, 279, 310, 314, 317, 324, 326, 327, 328, 332, 340, 341, 368n3; defined, 25; use in metaphor, 10, 243 Linnaeus, 50 Lio, 25, 34, 63, 67, 90, 110, 113, 133, 139, 183, 184, 190, 220, 229, 248, 257, 275, 276, 298, 306, 308, 365n1 (ch. 1), 365–6n1 (ch. 2) literacy, 4 lizards, xii, 92, 120, 175, 182, 243–4, 246, 247, 254–62, 277, 279, 283, 310, 312, 313, 314, 315, 319, 321, 322, 329, 341, 345, 348, 356, 357, 368–9n4; Flying lizards, 254, 277; House lizards, 254, 277; monitor lizards, xii, 92, 175, 182, 229, 247, 254–6, 277, 283, 310, 312, 319, 329, 341, 345, 348, 357, 368–9n4; skinks, 254, 257–8, 277, 318, 320, 322, 341; Tokay geckoes, 12, 254, 258–

INDEX

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 385

62, 265, 269, 277, 308, 312, 315, 317, 319, 338, 341, 351–2, 356 louse, lice, 126, 295 macaques. See monkeys magic, magical ritual, 37, 50, 250, 260, 293, 307, 321, 322, 324, 325, 331 Malayo-Polynesian languages, 4, 35, 83, 148, 267 mammals, 3, 25, 26–7, 48, 53–159, 174, 181, 189, 227, 243, 279, 287, 317, 321, 325, 326, 329, 333, 336, 340, 341, 342, 351, 368n3 (ch. 8); domestic mammal metaphors, 53– 121, 160, 326, 336–7, 340; predominance of mammals in metaphors, 26–7, 161, 310–15, 326–7, 333; wild mammal metaphors, 122–59, 160, 336–7, 340, 342; wild mammals as spirit livestock, 48, 323, 332 Manggarai, 120 mantis, 101, 283, 309, 319, 348 marriage, 4, 32–3, 58–9, 75–6, 77, 78, 80, 92, 98, 104, 111, 169, 173, 180–1, 185, 186, 283, 284, 287, 343, 345, 347, 366n4; polygyny, 77, 270; trial marriage, 152 metaphor: anthropological uses of “metaphor,” 28, 36–42, 43, 49, 343, 358, 360, 364; and belief, 49–51; cognitive distinctiveness of, 47, 49–50, 51, 321–2, 331, 359, 363–4; conceptual metaphor, 12–13, 41, 50, 81, 84–5, 100, 107, 114, 209, 346; conventional metaphor, 7–8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 24, 25, 27, 29, 30, 36–8, 39, 40, 41, 42, 47–8, 49, 50–1, 84, 190, 219, 313, 315, 322, 329, 330–2, 334, 343, 353, 360, 361, 363, 364; definition of metaphor, 5–6; empirical basis of animal metaphors, 15, 16–17, 48, 49, 51, 317–21; human metaphors, 355; influence on quasiempirical ideas, 134, 322; metaphors motivated by non-empirical ideas, 321– 2, 324, 325–6, 329–30; Nage concept of, 18, 30–6, 47, 50, 51, 365n1 (ch. 2); original Greek sense of “metaphor,” 5–6; private metaphor, 261; and simile, 17–19, 30, 38, 42, 365n3, 365n1 (ch. 2); social and moral

INDEX

use of metaphors, 336–52; social efficacy of animal metaphors, 352–4; source and target domains, 13–15, 17, 22, 36, 51, 335, 366n2; translation of, 21, 25; visual metaphor, 11. See also metonymy; motivation methods, field methods, 20–5 metonymy, 6–7, 17, 19, 36, 37, 39, 40, 43, 58, 176, 181, 366n4 mice. See rats and mice Midgley, M., 354 monkeys, 10, 13, 16, 92, 97, 117, 127, 129, 144, 146–59, 160, 189, 190, 245, 252, 260, 266– 7, 293, 305, 312, 315, 318, 321, 329, 335, 339, 340, 342, 343, 344, 346, 349, 350, 351, 357, 361; in Japan, 41 Montaine, M. de, 354 Morgan, J., 7 motivation, 14, 15–17, 19, 21–4, 25–6, 315– 26, 327–31, 356; cultural motivation, 16, 320–6, 328, 330 multitasking, 349 Munde (region), 125 mynah (bird), 222–3, 367n4 myth, myths, 3, 6, 16, 26, 37, 47, 113, 161, 190, 201, 207, 213, 235, 240, 264, 313, 321, 324, 325, 330, 331, 360 Nage, 3–5; central Nage, 4, 21; concept of metaphor. See also metaphor names, naming: animal names for human body parts, 11, 26, 338; animals named metaphorically after human body parts, 11; metaphorical names, 313–15, 321, 324, 330–1; monomial and binomial animal names, 240–1, 243, 276–8, 309, 326–7, 329, 367n4 naturalism, 13, 20, 27, 29, 51, 52, 358–9, 361, 369n4 neo-animism. See animism Ngadha, 25, 34, 65, 67, 89, 90, 102, 110, 112, 133, 138, 142, 153, 159, 183, 206, 248, 257, 276, 292, 296, 298, 299, 365–6n1 Ngadha-Lio language group, 25, 34 nitu. See spirits Nuer, 40–1, 42, 43, 49, 64, 67, 172, 184, 366n4

385

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 386

Ohnuki-Tierney, E., 41 omens: animals as, 98, 143, 144, 180, 184, 191, 200, 210, 220, 221, 223, 224, 324. See also augury onomatopoeia, 119, 169, 217, 222, 229, 236, 237, 239, 254, 259–60, 334 ontology, ontological pluralism, xii, 5, 12, 13, 27, 28–30, 38, 47, 49, 51–2, 271, 335, 336, 354, 355–64 oriole, 203–4, 223–4, 241, 321 Orwell, G., 310 owls, 164, 195, 219, 224–5, 323, 324, 331–2, 344; hawk-owl, 184, 225 Palmatier, R., 149, 240, 243–4, 279, 303, 311, 314, 367n3, 369n3 parallelism, parallelistic speech, 32, 83, 84, 92, 122, 156, 168, 210, 212, 216, 222, 266, 288–9, 308, 327, 329 pata néke (song genre), 31, 106, 130, 156, 171, 208, 209, 217, 231, 337, 343, 345 pata péle (Nage term for “metaphor”), 18, 30–6, 47, 50, 51, 365n1 (ch. 2) Peirce, C.S., 11 perspectivism, 46, 359 pets, pet animals, 96, 144, 145, 146, 155, 321 pigeons and doves, 19, 65, 162, 206, 208–9, 210–11, 212–14, 220, 225–7, 229–33, 235, 241, 312, 316, 318–19, 323, 328, 335, 347, 352, 367n4 pigs, 4, 11, 17, 33, 53, 54, 62, 64, 67, 69, 84, 85, 91–2, 100, 103–13, 122–3, 127, 152–3, 159, 160, 173, 181, 184, 195, 205, 252, 257, 272, 275–6, 297, 314, 315, 318, 320, 322, 326, 327, 328, 339, 339, 340, 346, 347, 351, 352, 357 plants: as Nage totems, 38; plant (botanical) metaphors, 39, 59, 85, 104, 127, 265, 333, 334; plant names incorporating animal metaphors, 10, 26, 34, 83, 313, 314, 315, 337 polysemy, 315, 316, 317 porcupines, 92, 97, 126–9, 130, 150, 153, 160, 195, 215, 227, 311, 312, 315, 328, 329, 337, 339, 340, 346, 357, 368n1 (ch. 8) prosody, prosodic effects, 17, 82, 86, 98, 127, 128, 133, 134, 144, 156, 157, 166, 168,

386

189, 193, 210, 216, 217, 227, 241, 267, 271, 285, 305, 327–8, 329 prototype theory, 7 proverbs, 23, 34, 55, 59–60, 127, 145, 176, 187, 191, 193, 201, 203, 211, 226, 266, 271, 308, 337–8, 352, 365n1 (ch. 2) pugilistic competitions (etu), 31, 62, 106, 116–17, 188, 202, 232, 266, 284, 287, 303, 352 quails, 19, 180, 211, 216, 226–8, 231, 232, 312, 328, 329, 331, 351 Radcliffe-Brown, A.R., 161 rainbow, 248 ranks. See social ranks rats and mice, 19, 53–4, 130, 132–40, 141, 142, 160, 227, 229, 246, 253, 307, 312–13, 314, 315, 318–19, 322, 329, 332, 340, 342, 344, 346, 349, 350, 356, 357, 368n1 (ch. 8). See also Giant rats; shrews reciprocal inversion, 46 Réndu (region), 116, 117, 125, 157–8, 266 rhyme. See prosody rice cultivation, 4, 48, 68, 70, 148–9, 281, 295, 301, 347 riddles, 307, 308 rites, ritual, 4, 6, 7, 11, 24, 37, 40, 44, 47, 50, 67, 69, 105, 107, 122, 207, 227, 234, 246, 287, 288, 313, 332; ritual language, 31, 34. See also hunting: annual ritual hunt; sacrifice Rosaldo, M., 41 sacrifice, sacrificial ritual, 4, 45, 48, 49, 50, 54, 55, 60, 67, 169, 184, 286, 287, 323, 359; sacrificial posts, 12, 24, 261, 275 scorpions, 302, 303, 307–8 scrubfowl, 228–9, 367n4 seaward or downstream direction (lau), 68–9, 92, 98, 124, 165, 191, 194, 210, 274 sex: sex differentiable terms, 63, 64, 89, 126–7, 133, 170, 181; sexual themes in metaphor, 13, 19, 31, 45, 58–9, 76–7, 81, 85, 89–90, 96, 98–100, 106–7, 133, 139, 156, 165, 174, 209, 217–18, 225, 256, 273, 296–7, 316, 343, 345, 346

INDEX

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 387

sheep, 63, 79–83, 86, 104, 160, 328, 340, 341, 342, 350 shellfish, 321 shrews, 130, 132, 133, 139–42, 160, 176, 312, 319, 340, 344, 350 Sikkanese, 34, 253 slugs, 11, 309, 319 snails, 308, 309, 317, 319 snakes, 10, 22, 157, 184, 229, 243–54, 256, 261, 276, 310, 312, 314, 315, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 329, 332, 339, 341, 344, 348, 350, 352, 368–9n4; bronzeback (snake), 157, 250–2, 277, 318, 322, 329, 348, 350, 351, 368–9n4; Flying snake, 276, 277; mock viper, 249, 314, 315; pipe snake, 247, 322; pit viper, 10, 182, 252–3, 277, 310, 361, 367n2; python, 10, 223, 252, 253, 274, 310, 313, 323; rat snake, 253, 277; Russell’s viper, 249, 250, 277, 338 So’a, 102, 112, 121, 126, 129, 258 social efficacy of animal metaphors. See metaphor social ranks, 4, 19–20, 45, 58–9, 64, 94, 134, 135, 220, 248, 297, 304, 334, 342 song, singing, 23, 31, 106, 165, 171, 188, 196, 198, 201, 208–9, 211, 220–1, 234, 239–40, 263, 281, 285, 292, 300, 303, 305, 308, 323, 324, 326, 327, 337; planting songs, 78, 166, 167, 168, 187, 191, 193, 199, 202, 206, 217, 222, 231, 235, 303, 305; songs of mourning, 43, 172, 177, 194, 209–10, 223, 225, 323; while circle-dancing, 92, 106, 130, 187, 217, 259–60, 266, 308; work songs, 196. See also pata néke soul, souls, 46, 67, 176–7, 191, 219–20, 225– 6, 240, 316, 322–3, 324, 331, 332, 336, 358, 359, 360, 361, 369n2, 369n4. See also spirits Sperber, D., 24, 39, 49–51 spiders, 112, 119–20, 279, 296, 302, 324, 349 spirits, spiritual or supernatural beings, 10, 45–8, 51, 55, 67, 105, 126, 169, 178, 184, 194, 213–14, 216, 219–20, 246, 250, 277, 313, 321, 322–4, 325, 330–3, 351, 359, 368n4; as inverted beings, 213, 332–3, 368n4. See also soul, souls stars, 113

INDEX

structuralism, 37, 38, 40, 41, 343 stubtail (bird), 199–200, 219, 233–4, 241, 321 Sumba, Sumbanese, 21, 107, 158, 227, 229, 264, 292, 369n1; Sumbanese concept of metaphor, 34, 35 sunbird, 123, 204, 234–5, 241, 321 swallows and swifts, 235, 357 symbolism: of animals, 3, 12, 20, 321–2, 330–1; cognitive approaches to, 24–5, 49–51, 321; and metaphor, 15, 26, 39, 50– 1, 363–4; and taxonomy, 44, 316; symbolic and utilitarian value, 324–6, 330; symbolic motivation of metaphors. See also motivation: cultural motivation synecdoche, 6, 11, 12, 43, 60, 92, 116, 298 synonymity: in animal metaphor, 16, 39, 70, 72, 74, 77, 110–11, 127, 131, 142, 144, 153, 211, 215, 235, 237, 245, 260, 269, 273, 274, 283 taboo, 40–1, 44, 50, 126, 146, 158, 247, 250, 298, 321, 331, 332, 341 tadpole, 268, 272, 278, 319, 348, 368n3 (ch. 6). See also frogs Tambiah, S., 39, 41 tattooing, 12 taxonomy, folk taxonomy, 9–10, 45, 53, 64, 101, 111, 112, 119, 130, 135, 138, 191, 196, 205, 221, 243, 247, 249, 261, 268, 279, 280, 281, 285, 304, 313, 314, 316, 325–6, 328 termites, 298, 300, 319 Thais, 39, 41 toddy, 106, 123, 142, 169, 173, 175, 235. See also Arenga palm totemism, 9, 37–9, 42, 43, 161, 334–5, 356, 359, 366n3; in Nage, 38 transformation: beliefs in animal transformation, 54, 67, 143, 240, 264, 268, 317, 360 Turner, V., 23 turtles, 229, 275–6, 314, 347 Tylor, E. B., 358 ‘Ua, 82, 86, 225, 227, 229, 272, 328, 342 universals, xii, 12, 209, 273, 327, 364 urine, urination, 55, 74, 94, 102, 197, 331, 339

387

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 388

utilitarian motivation of metaphors. See motivation: cultural motivation utilitarianism in anthropology, 325–6 Valeri, V., 39–40 Verheijen, J.A.J., 67, 102, 112, 113, 120, 121, 126, 138, 183, 248, 258 vipers. See snakes Viveiros de Castro, 30, 46, 52, 358, 359, 361 war, warfare, 69–70, 124, 362 wasps, 112, 279, 280, 283–5, 309, 319, 347, 348 water buffalo. See buffalo waterhen, 11, 23, 101, 211, 237–9 weaving, 12, 368–9n4; textile motifs, 281–2

388

West, H.G., 46 whistler (bird), 223, 227, 239–40, 321, 324 wife-givers and wife-takers, 4, 62, 78, 87, 110–11, 169, 173, 175–6, 178, 181, 185, 283, 342, 347, 366n4 Willis, R., 366n3 witches, 9, 46, 67, 69, 92–3, 115, 164, 180, 184, 190, 192, 194, 219, 221, 225, 307, 322, 323, 324, 332; as inverted beings, 163–4 witu tui bird, 236, 321 wood-carving. See carving Yoruba, 45, 337 zoomorphism, 356

INDEX

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page i

A DOG PISSING AT THE EDGE OF A PATH

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page ii

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page iii

G R E G O RY F O RT H

A DOG PI SSI NG AT THE EDGE OF A PATH Animal Metaphors in an Eastern Indonesian Society

McGill-Queen’s University Press Montreal & Kingston

•

London

•

Chicago

© McGill-Queen’s University Press 2019 isbn 978-0-7735-5922-6 (cloth) isbn 978-0-7735-5923-3 (paper) isbn 978-0-2280-0004-4 (epdf) isbn 978-0-2280-0005-1 (epub) Legal deposit fourth quarter 2019 Bibliothèque nationale du Québec Printed in Canada on acid-free paper that is 100% ancient forest free (100% post-consumer recycled), processed chlorine free

We acknowledge the support of the Canada Council for the Arts. Nous remercions le Conseil des arts du Canada de son soutien.

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Title: A dog pissing at the edge of a path : animal metaphors in an eastern Indonesian society / Gregory Forth. Names: Forth, Gregory, author. Description: Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: Canadiana (print) 20190171820 | Canadiana (ebook) 20190171944 | isbn 9780773559226 (cloth) | isbn 9780773559233 (paper) | isbn 9780228000044 (epdf) | isbn 9780228000051 (epub) Subjects: lcsh: Metaphor—Social aspects—Indonesia—Flores Island. | lcsh: Animals—Social aspects—Indonesia—Flores Island. | lcsh: Human-animal relationships—Indonesia—Flores Island. | lcsh: Nage (Indonesian people)—Social life and customs. | lcsh: Nage (Indonesian people)—Ethnozoology—Indonesia— Flores Island. Classification: lcc p301.5.m48 f67 2019 | ddc 306.442/99221—dc23

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page v

For my wife, Christine

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page vii

Contents

Figures and Tables Preface

•

ix

•

xi

Note on Orthography 1 Introductory Matters

xv

•

•

3

2 Metaphors and “Metaphor” in Human-Animal Relations 3 Domestic Mammal Metaphors – and Some Wild Variants 4 Mammals in Metaphor: Exclusively Wild Kinds 5 Talking with Birds

•

•

28

• •

53

122

161

6 Other Non-Mammals in Metaphor: Snakes, Lizards, Fish, Frogs, and More

243

•

7 Metaphors with Bugs: Insects and Other Invertebrates

•

279

8 The Differential Metaphorical Value of Different Animals

•

310

9 Animal Metaphors in Social and Ontological Perspective

•

336

Notes

•

365

References Index

•

•

381

371

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page ix

Figures and Tables

Figures All photographs taken by author unless otherwise specified. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Buffalo with a nose-ring (No. 7) • 56 “Dove” and “buffalo” coconuts (No. 25) • 66 Horses about to be led to pasture (No. 40) • 71 Balinese cow (No. 60) • 80 Goat on a rock (No. 74) • 87 Newly acquired dog, chained (No. 103) • 99 Sow with piglets (No. 123) • 107 Slaughtering pigs in the traditional manner (No. 127) • 109 Cat with a bent tail (No. 144) • 115 Hunters at a shrine, annual ritual hunt (No. 163) • 123 Porcupines in a cage (No. 172) • 128 Dog with Giant rat (No. 176) • 131 Hunter with Giant rat (No. 179) • 132 “Rat’s tail” (No. 196) • 140 Pet civet (No. 206) • 145 “Civet’s vulva” (No. 208) • 147 Pet monkey (No. 231) • 155 Tethered cock with owner (No. 260) • 170 Male speckled fowl (No. 281) • 179 Fantail (No. 332). Donna McKinnon • 199 Man with “Fantail’s Tail” hair (No. 334) • 200

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page x

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Friarbird (No. 337). Donna McKinnon • 203 Junglefowl cock (No. 365) • 215 Injured Black-naped oriole (No. 387) • 224 Young Barred doves (No. 401) • 230 “Dove droppings” (No. 408) • 233 Waterhen (No. 416) • 238 Viper tree (No. 433) • 251 Grasshopper eggs motif (No. 496) • 282 Gourd-shell vessels (No. 532) • 297 Tables

1 2 3 4

x

Totals of metaphors involving different mammals • 160 Examples of synonymity in animal metaphors • 318–19 Cultural factors motivating animal metaphors • 325 Human values in animal metaphors: life forms and selected individual categories • 340–1

F I G U R E S A N D TA B L E S

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xi

Preface

This book started off as a remnant of another (Forth 2016). When some years ago I began writing a monograph on the folk zoology of the Nage people of eastern Indonesia – the various kinds of knowledge they possessed concerning non-human animals – I planned to include a comprehensive coverage of animal metaphors. However, it soon became apparent that Nage animal metaphors were far too numerous to treat adequately in that volume, and that a separate book would be in order. Especially from further field research conducted between 2014 and 2018, I also realized that I had rather more to say about how Nage understood metaphor and about the concept of metaphor in general. More particularly, it became clear that the Nage regard standard (or “conventional”) animal metaphors, including the majority that use animals to talk about humans and human behaviours, ultimately as fictions. That is, they recognize that a person spoken of as a “dog pissing at the edge of a path,” say, is not really a dog nor, by virtue of certain actions, has she or he temporarily become a dog. And conversely, they know that using dogs and other animals to speak about humans – the fact that humans and animals can be brought together in this manner – does not mean that these creatures are in some essential sense human. Expressed another way, people in this small-scale eastern Indonesian community of cultivators, hunters, and raisers of livestock understand their metaphors in much the same way as Westerners understand theirs – as special ways of speaking and not as articulations of radically different ways of experiencing the world. In fact, many Nage metaphors are closely comparable to animal metaphors found in English, if not always in regard to the animals

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xii

employed, then in specific animal behaviours or interpretations recognized by their users – a finding that should attract the attention of anyone interested in human cognition and human universals. Readers will thus discover, for example, that both in English and in the language of a small eastern Indonesian island, muscles are referred to with words that ultimately mean “mouse”; that duplicity is conveyed by an animal (the monitor lizard) with a forked tongue; that the straight tail of a civet stands for honesty; and that the dog metaphor from which this book takes its title is closely comparable to the anglophone expression “to piss about.” To many readers, or at least many of those who are not anthropologists, this finding may not come as much of a surprise. However, in recent years a number of anthropologists have advanced a view of metaphor as a peculiarly Western concept that many of their colleagues have unwittingly imposed on their ethnographic subjects. What is more, writers who have been described as “ontological pluralists” (discussed at some length in chapter 9) have argued that non-Westerners – or some ill-defined portion of them – understand the contrast of “human” and “animal” in a fundamentally different way from modern Westerners. It has further been suggested that such people do not possess animal metaphors, at least not in the sense this term is understood in reference to English (or European language) usage. My aim in this book is to demonstrate, through an extensive and detailed exploration of the animal metaphors of one non-Western society – one I know particularly well from some thirty-five years of field research – that this view is fundamentally incorrect. Although I am an anthropologist, this book is not written exclusively for anthropologists but, rather, for anyone interested in the topic of metaphor. As such it should appeal to several different audiences. In addition to anthropologists and linguists concerned either with the phenomenon or concept of metaphor, more specialist readers would include philosophers of language, Southeast Asianists, people involved in the study of specific languages and literatures, and – since Nage animal metaphors employ 140 animal kinds, the large majority corresponding to single species – perhaps even zoologists, ethologists, and ecologists. Regardless of specific disciplinary interests, moreover, the book is constructed as a comparative resource, a reference work of sorts, for anyone interested in any aspect of animal metaphors. Indeed, I very much wish I had had something similar available for a language other than English while researching and writing the present volume.

xii

P R E FA C E

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xiii

On the other hand, more general readers might read the book simply to discover similarities and differences between the animal metaphors of a small eastern Indonesian community and those with which they are familiar from their own language, which is most likely to be English. By the same token, the 566 metaphors that compose the core of the book could be read mainly for pleasure; in fact, many may be found not only insightful and imaginative but also aesthetically appealing and, in some instances, even humorous – thus replicating an assessment by Nage people themselves. Such readers might therefore leave the first two and the last two chapters and proceed directly to chapters 3 to 7. Nevertheless, I hope that, however readers’ interests are motivated, a perusal of individual metaphors will encourage them to turn to the general discussions on the nature of metaphor (and especially animal metaphors) found in the first two and last two chapters. Whatever success can be claimed for the present study is due mainly to the generous assistance of Nage friends and associates who, for three and a half decades, have allowed me to participate in many aspects of their lives. It would be impossible to mention everyone who, knowingly or unknowingly, has provided me with insight into Nage metaphors. Nevertheless, special thanks are owed to several regular commentators, including (in no particular order): Fidelis Laja Ga’e, Theresia Mea Béli, Joseph Méze Bha, Agnes Wula Meno, Fidelis Lowa Sada, Cornelis Kodhi Léjo, Gaspar Wélu Déde, Laurens Toda, Yohanes Soda Ule, Stefanus Ngato, Rofina Ule, Petrus Lape Ga’e, David Waghi, Arnoldus Nuwa Bupu, Ambrosius Busa, and Petronela Bolo. In addition, I wish to give separate mention to four men who helped me, not just with my study of metaphor but with a variety of ethnographic investigations, but who, sadly, died during the course of my research – namely, Emiel Waso Ea (decd. 1994), Thomas Cola Bha (2008), Eperadus Dhoi Léwa (2018), and Cyrilus Bau Engo (also 2018). I am also grateful to the editorial staff at McGill-Queen’s University Press and especially to editor-in-chief Jonathan Crago, who from the beginning has given me consistent support and encouragement and has expeditiously seen the manuscript through to final publication. Another debt is owed to two anonymous readers, who evidently expended considerable time and effort in reviewing the manuscript and offering suggestions for improvement. Field research for this project was funded mostly from grants awarded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Since 1984, when I first visited Nage country, research visits to Indonesia were sponsored

P R E FA C E

xiii

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xiv

by the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (lipi), Nusa Cendana and Artha Wacana Universities in Kupang, and St Paul’s Major Seminary in Ledalero, Flores. The assistance provided by all of these bodies is greatly appreciated. Finally, thanks are due to Donna McKinnon for producing line drawings of two birds I was unable to photograph: the fantail and the friarbird (figures 20 and 22). Gregory Forth January 2019

xiv

P R E FA C E

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xv

Note on Orthography

Vowels English comparisons are approximate: /a/ (as in “cat”) /é/ (as in “bay”) /e/ in the first syllable of bisyllabic words is the schwa, tending sometimes to a short /e/ as in English “get.” In monosyllables (e.g., me, “to bleat [of a goat]”) and in the second syllable of bisyllabic words (e.g., Nage, pronounced roughly as “Na-gay”) it is pronounced as /é/, as it is when followed or preceded by a glottal stop (as in le’e, “bow”). In these instances the sound is not written as é, in the interests of parsimony and also to accord with the practice of literate Nage themselves. /i/ (as in “fit”) /o/ (as in “dot”) /u/ (as in “root”) Consonants All consonants have approximately the same value they do in English, with the following exceptions: /bh/, an implosive /b/ /c/, pronounced as in “chat” /dh/, an implosive /d/

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xvi

/gh/, voiced velar fricative /ng/, always pronounced as in “singer,” never as in “finger” /’/ marks the glottal stop, which occurs only initially or between vowels (see ‘é’e, “ugly, plain”).

xvi

NOTE ON ORTHOGRAPHY

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 3

1 Introductory Matters

English-speakers, and most likely speakers of any language, will be familiar with the common practice of calling people by an expression incorporating an animal name (English examples include “a rat,” “a fat pig,” “a sly fox”) or comparing someone to an animal (“strong as an ox,” “mad as a March hare”). They will also be aware that such expressions are commonly employed when describing the character, actions, attitudes, circumstances, abilities, or appearance of a human individual or human collectivity. I have written this book in the conviction that metaphors incorporating animals are an important part of any society’s knowledge of both non-human animals and of themselves, and are therefore essential to a comprehensive and properly informed understanding of a human community’s relations, both conceptual and practical, with fellow humans as well as with other zoological kinds. As a way people talk about other humans, there appears to be a widespread consensus that animal categories are an especially prominent, even the most prominent, kind of category deployed metaphorically the world over (e.g., Lawrence 1993, 301; see also Fernandez 1986, 11–14). Similar observations have been made concerning the very regular occurrence of animals in myth, augury, and other forms of cultural symbolism (Hunn 2011; Forth 2017a). By reviewing the metaphors of one non-Western society – a corpus of 566 expressions incorporating 140 different categories of mammals, birds, and animals of other kinds recorded over a period of more than thirty years – one purpose of this book is to shed light on this symbolic prominence. The people in question are the Nage (pronounced approximately as “Na-gay”), who inhabit the central part of the island of Flores in eastern Indonesia. More

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 4

particularly, I focus on a population of some twelve thousand people whom I have previously distinguished as “central Nage,” residing in the vicinity of the village of Bo’a Wae, the political and cultural centre of a larger region that, since colonial times, has been designated as Nage. All metaphors discussed below are therefore drawn from the dialect of central Nage (see Orthography), which, like all Flores Island languages, belongs to a grouping designated as Central-Malayo-Polynesian. As described in previous publications, central Nage people, although increasingly involved in a monetary economy, make their living as cultivators, raisers of livestock, and hunters. Rice grown in irrigated fields has for several decades been the principal crop, but Nage still plant maize and other cereals as well as a variety of tubers, green vegetables, fruits, and other cultigens. During roughly the same period, the majority of central Nage have converted to Roman Catholicism. Yet they maintain an indigenous spiritual cosmology and continue to perform associated rituals, and most Nage still observe traditional marriage rules and preferences, including clan or lineage exogamy, marriage within one of two hereditary ranks (sometimes described as “nobles” and “slaves”), and a modified system of asymmetric affinal alliance (requiring a strict distinction between “wife-givers” and “wife-takers”). Major rites involve animal sacrifice. The most valued sacrificial victims are water buffalo, animals that, together with horses and smaller livestock, continue to form a major and essential part of a bridewealth (goods given for a wife by the husband’s group), while pigs are an important part of the bride’s group’s counter-gift. Exploring various forms of knowledge and practice concerning both wild and domestic animals, Nage folk zoology is the subject of a recent book entitled Why the Porcupine Is Not a Bird (Forth 2016). A Dog Pissing at the Edge of a Path extends and complements that book, and references to the earlier work are made throughout. As literacy was introduced to Nage less than one hundred years ago, specifically by missionaries teaching partly in Dutch but mostly in Malay (the language that was to become the basis of the Indonesian national language), Nage are heirs to an exclusively oral tradition, and the metaphors I discuss below directly reflect this tradition. Apart from documenting several hundred metaphorical expressions and demonstrating the variety, complexity, and aesthetic and philosophical value of animal metaphors in use among members of a small-scale, non-Western society, the present book aims to address more general issues in the study of metaphor. One such issue concerns how

4

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 5

far the ultimately European concept of “metaphor” resonates in a very different language and tradition – or, otherwise expressed, it concerns the extent to which Nage metaphors correspond to what anglophones, say, would regard as metaphor, and how Nage ideas about these correspond to the Western concept of metaphor. In regard to animal metaphors specifically, a study of Nage usages further facilitates an exploration of what metaphors reveal about human-animal relations – for example, the place of metaphors in relation to knowledge of various kinds about non-human animals maintained by members of a particular society, and the part, practical or otherwise, that animals play in human lives. Yet another question concerns what metaphors may reveal about cultural variation in perceptions of differences and similarities between humans and non-human animals, and, moreover, how animal metaphors may reflect, but also inform, ideas about human behaviour, social values, and representations of different categories of people. All this bears on a particular issue in current anthropology – namely, the ontological question of whether, in what they say about and how they act towards animals, different societies display fundamental differences in conceptions of the relation between non-human animals and humans (see e.g., Descola 2013; Ingold 2011; Viveiros de Castro 2014). Investigating how a society’s standard metaphors can contribute to this debate is a major objective of this book. “Metaphor,” “Animal,” and Other Matters Using the term in a fairly broad sense, though more particularly as a reference to semantic relations (how words convey meanings), metaphor is pervasive in natural languages. One could go so far as to say that it is an aspect of most if not all linguistic utterances. To cite some familiar instances, in English one not only speaks, necessarily, of the “hands” of a clock, the “legs” of a table, or the “eye” of a needle but also of the “flow” of speech and the “root” of a problem or of a word. As these examples suggest, in any language many metaphors are not recognized as such, and in this connection we speak, again metaphorically, of “dead” as opposed to “living metaphors” – even though the difference between these is sometimes difficult to determine. (Does a clock really have “hands”?) “Metaphor” (ultimately from Greek metapherein, “transfer,” Shorter Oxford English Dictionary) can be defined as any representation in which a category

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

5

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 6

or concept from one semantic domain is transferred or carried over to a different domain. Thus, in the examples cited above, parts of the human body are transferred to the domains of chronometers and needles (both material artefacts), and a property of liquids is transferred to human speech or time (things that are immaterial or at least not directly visible). Questions have been raised about the delimitation of semantic domains and how far these might vary cross-culturally. Thus, some anthropologists might question whether non-Westerners conceive of human beings and non-human animals as belonging to two different “domains” or, if they do, whether the domains are distinguished in the same way as Westerners would distinguish them. These are matters I deal with later, but for the moment I would just mention that Nage ethnography reveals that these eastern Indonesians conceive of humans and animals as quite different sorts of beings, and that they appear to do so in much the same way as do ordinary speakers of English. Given that metaphor entails what are recognized as two different domains, the concept equally requires that things belonging to these domains are sufficiently similar and comparable that one can be employed to represent the other. Indeed, similarity and substitutability (the possibility of substituting one thing with another, e.g., a brave man with a lion) are the crucial features of metaphor that Roman Jakobson identifies in distinguishing metaphor as one of the two major forms of meaning creation in natural languages (see Jakobson and Halle 1956). The other is metonymy, which by contrast involves contiguity and displacement – as, for example, when “crown” refers to a monarch or the institution of monarchy. As this example also demonstrates, with metonymy a term and its referent belong to the same domain. As linguists and anthropologists are aware, these two categories have been treated as components of a longer series of “tropes” (types of figurative language) that further includes synecdoche and hyperbole. Yet metaphor and metonymy are regarded as the basic types, while synecdoche (using a particular instance to refer to a general entity or vice versa) and hyperbole (substituting a greater for a lesser quality or degree) can be understood as variants of metonymy, as perhaps can irony (replacing a thing with its contrary). At the same time, metaphor and metonymy have been applied to more than verbal utterances and especially to identify contrasting structural properties of representations expressed, for example, in ritual, myth, and spiritual cosmology. Regarding humans and animals, anthropologists will be familiar with interpretations of the Bororo identification of their men with red macaws (a species of parrot,

6

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 7

Ara macao) – an identification partly played out in ritual – as an idea grounded in both metaphoric and metonymic relations (Crocker 1977a; T. Turner 1991). Metonymy too has been treated as a variety of metaphor. If nothing else, this demonstrates the complexity (and lack of consistency) encountered in the analytical deployment of all these terms. However, when I speak of Nage “animal metaphors,” I use “metaphor” in the commonest sense to refer to conventional expressions in which statements describing animals or animal behaviours are used to talk about things that, for language-users, are not animals and that for the most part include human beings and attributes, behaviours, circumstances, and conditions differentially distributed or manifest among human individuals. By describing such expressions as “conventional” I follow Kövecses (2010, 33–4), who employs the term not to mean “arbitrary” (as in other linguistic and semiotic usage) but simply “well established and well entrenched” through regular use. Synonymous designations include Morgan’s (1993, 129) “institutionalized metaphor” and “stored metaphor,” defined as usages “with which everyone is familiar” and that, by contrast to metaphors that a person has not previously encountered, do not need “figuring out.” (At the same time, Morgan notes that conventional metaphors are not “idioms,” by which he means phrases that are not intelligible from analysis or translation of their parts and so must be comprehended as wholes.) Metaphors, including animal metaphors, can of course also be ideolectal – peculiar to individuals, single families, or other small groups of people – or the novel constructions of authors of poetry or other forms of creative or rhetorical speech or writing. It can be readily assumed that all conventional metaphors ultimately derive from the innovative constructs of single men and women. But equally obviously, such verbal inventions are ones that have survived and spread within a larger population, albeit possibly undergoing change with increasing use, and to that extent they are ways of talking about things that are shared and social – which is to say, “conventional.” (The extent to which such metaphors reflect common ways of thinking, about animals, for example, is another matter, which I consider in later chapters.) In prototype theory (e.g., Lakoff 1987), in which a single animal name (e.g., English “rat”) is conventionally applied to humans, the non-animal gloss (e.g., “a despicable person”) can be taken as a peripheral or less central sense of the name’s primary or prototypical meaning (e.g., “a kind of animal”).

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

7

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 8

Thus, in dictionaries one regularly finds metaphorical senses of a term listed after the primary sense. The same would apply, for example, to a word like “father,” which primarily means “male parent” but has secondary (nonprototypical) senses like “Catholic priest” or “founder (e.g., of a nation or academic discipline).” Yet this does not mean that English speakers employing “rat,” for example, to refer to a human being would not usually recognize that the person in question and the small murine creature are quite different sorts of living things or, otherwise expressed, belong to different domains. As far as conventional metaphors are concerned, what applies to English and other European languages applies equally to Nage. Thus, linking humans and particular animals in regularly expressed and culturally standard ways, Nage animal metaphors can be analyzed as employing members of an “animal domain” to talk about members of a “human domain.” These specifications work for Nage because they too distinguish “animals” and “humans” by name – respectively, as ana wa and kita ata (Forth 2016, 52–61). And these named categories correspond closely to “animal” and “human” as ordinarily understood by anglophones, even though, unlike educated anglophones, Nage do not conceive of humans (kita ata) as a subclass of animals (ana wa). As the Nage word for “animal,” ana wa deserves further attention partly because the term itself has metaphorical uses. Besides serving as a higher-order folk taxon encompassing all non-human animals, Nage also apply ana wa to small children. According to their own view, the usage is motivated by the fact that young children lack powers of understanding and communication, making them comparable to non-human creatures. At the same time, ana wa may be doubly metaphoric insofar as ana has as its primary sense “child, immature human,” as revealed in a local interpretation of ana wa as meaning “children (or people) of the wind” (Forth 1989). Nevertheless, besides “child, young person (and young animal),” ana has other senses, including a small version or portion of something and a subordinate or member of a collectivity (as in ana tana, a person who is native to a territory, tana). In fact, it is probably this last sense, rather than “child,” that is relevant to ana wa, “animal,” and moreover to another Nage usage, where ana alone refers to individual animals in relation to the larger kind (as in the question ana apa ke?, “what [kind of] animal is that?”). How wa should be understood is more controversial. Although central Nage sometimes understand it as the word for “wind” (wa, angi wa), other evidence suggests a relation with the homonym wa (wera in other Nage dialects

8

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 9

and central Flores languages), which denotes the malevolent or “wild” spiritual essence of a witch (Forth 1989).1 As the Nage categories “animal” and “human” are not related taxonomically, it follows that any Nage statement identifying the two domains – like describing a person as a urinating dog or a human child as an animal – will be metaphorical. Especially for metaphors in regular use, this is confirmed by the fact that Nage themselves normally recognize their figurative character, that is, as references to subjects (including small children, regardless of how unsocialized they may be) that they would not normally regard as animals – just as an English-speaker describing someone as an “old goat” or a “pig” will ultimately realize that the person in question belongs to the species Homo sapiens and not to a species of the zoological genera Capra or Sus. Speaking of genera and species, it is worth pointing out that with animal metaphors, the animal – the member of the animal domain expressly named in the metaphor – is an entire category of animals. In contrast, the metaphorical referent, the member of the human domain, is typically a person, or occasionally a collection of persons, or at best a social rather than a taxonomic category. The distinction also obtains where metaphors employ a part or particular feature of an animal (as in “a dog’s hind leg” or “a pig’s eye”) since in these instances the item typically pertains to the entire species whereas the referent, particularly if it is human, remains a specific behaviour or attribute – and usually one distinguishing the person referred to from other people in relation to a socially recognized norm. In regard to this “whole-part” relationship, conventional animal metaphors evidently have something in common with animal totemism, whereby people belong to different groups associated with different animals, and which Lévi-Strauss (1963) argued was founded on a structural relation of “metaphor.” This observation applies as much to English and other languages as it does to Nage. Thus, to cite familiar English examples, terms like “lion,” “fox,” or “rat” refer not to features common to all members of the species Homo sapiens but only to some people, and then often only some people some of the time or in the context of particular activities or relationships. However, it is here that the similarity between totemism and conventional animal metaphor ends. Equally important are the differences, a matter I take up in chapters 2 and 8. As demonstrated elsewhere (Forth 2016), the animal (or “folk zoological”) categories Nage employ in their animal metaphors are for the very most part

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

9

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 10

what ethnobiologists call “folk-generics” – units of any folk taxonomy that tend to coincide with the species and genera of international biosystematics. For example, the folk-generic category that Nage name ‘o’a, “monkey,” a component of over thirty Nage metaphors, coincides with the species Macaca fascicularis, the Crab-eating macaque. English examples of folk-generics include “dog,” “cat,” “hawk,” “crow,” “rattlesnake,” and “salmon,” but not “snake” or “fish,” which anglophones would normally understand as names of more inclusive animal kinds. A minority of Nage metaphors employ categories corresponding to “snake” (nipa) and “fish” (ika) – as of course does English (“fish out of water,” “snake in the grass”) – but in the Nage corpus these are very much exceptions that prove the rule. In addition, a few metaphors use “folk-specifics” – categories that form subclasses of folk-generics (e.g., English “sparrowhawk” in relation to “hawk”) – but folk-specifics too occur in only a small number of Nage usages. Although not all folk-generics that compose Nage folk taxonomy bear regular names (Forth 2016, 38–9), all that occur in conventional metaphors naturally do. And it is significant that where Nage employ more inclusive animal categories as metaphors, like the aforementioned “fish” and “snake,” these are the only categories of this type – “life form taxa” in the lexicon of ethnobiology – that are named and, furthermore, are named with single lexemes (words), such as nipa (snake) and ika (fish). This is not to suggest that the possession of a distinct name is the main determinant of the metaphorical use of a given kind of animal. More than other types of animal categories, folk-generics (categories like “monkey,” “dog,” “hawk,” and so on) compose gestalts, components or “chunks” (D’Andrade 1995) of the natural world that present themselves as ineluctable wholes in a universal human perception. And in regard to their overall physical and behavioural homogeneity the same can be argued for snakes and fish, especially by comparison with internally more diverse categories like “mammal” and even “bird.” At the same time, Nage employ particular kinds of snakes in conventional metaphorical expressions (e.g., “python” and “pit viper”) as they also do several sorts of “fish” (e.g., “dolphin” and “Loach goby”). Animal metaphors also occur in Nage naming of human body parts (e.g., the finger tips, called “rhinoceros beetle’s rump”), trees and other plants, spiritual beings, types of buildings, other artefacts, objects, and even other animals – as in “sky dog,” naming both a cricket and a kind of bird. But these are far less common than metaphors applied to humans, which moreover

10

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 11

mostly comprise phrases describing an animal engaged in a certain act or in a particular situation (“a dog pissing at the edge of a path”) rather than simply an unqualified animal name or a phrase describing part of an animal. And while I include instances of these other forms of animal metaphor (in chapters 3 to 7), they are a secondary concern since the majority of Nage animal metaphors do indeed describe humans and human behaviour. As is common among other peoples, Nage use animals’ names as personal names and place names, but as I discuss these in earlier writings (Forth 2004a; Forth 2016), I do not include them here. Also not discussed are metaphorical names of animals that refer, for example, to the human body (e.g., toko ata, “human bone,” a stick insect; lema la, “protruding tongue,” slug) – thus the inverse of animal names applied to human body parts. Nor do I deal exhaustively with binary composites, standard expressions comprising two animal names that refer synecdochically to a larger grouping of animals (Forth 2016, 140–8). Expressions of this sort are listed only when they are further employed as conventional metaphors – for example, when lako wawi (“dog [and] pig”) refers to reproved human behaviours deemed animal-like. English-speakers will be familiar with animal metaphors that employ animal names as verbs, as in “rat on (someone),” “weasel out,” and “snake along” (said of a river or road). Such usages are relatively uncommon in Nage, and in fact I encountered just two possible instances, both involving birds. One is kuku raku, “waterhen,” used to describe people crowding around something by reference to the bird’s remarkable cries (see metaphor No. 417 in chapter 5). The other is kobe koka, “friarbird night” (No. 351), referring to a practice whereby a day is deliberately deleted from a lengthy ritual undertaking. The apparent rarity of such usages, however, appears mostly to be a function of syntactical differences between the two languages, as human behaviours expressed by verbal uses of “rat” and “weasel” in English, for example, are identified by other animal metaphors – as when Nage describe an evasive person, or someone who “weasels” out of things, as possessing “a cat’s waist” (No. 153). Animals also figure in what has been called “visual metaphor,” a notion similar to “icon” in Peirce’s (1930–35) typology (for an anthropological treatment, see Leach 1976, 10, 12). Examples familiar to Westerners include the association of specific animals with yoga positions, popular dances, human sexual positions, and martial arts poses, where the human body is disposed in a way that notionally resembles the form or movement of an animal. Visual

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

11

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 12

metaphors of these sorts are also rare among Nage, although two bird metaphors partly refer to dance movements (Nos. 306 and 414). It may be no coincidence that depictions of animal figures are similarly uncommon in Nage graphic art. The only weaving motif named after an animal is “grasshopper eggs” (No. 496), and while carved figures in wood on buildings and sacrificial posts include horses and domestic fowls, just two conventional motifs, both abstract geometric patterns, are named after animals (the Tokay gecko and the crocodile, Nos. 457 and 489, respectively). Tattooing seems not to have been a traditional practice in Nage (cf. Van Suchtelen 1919–21). Although nowadays one occasionally sees people with tattoos, animal figures are hardly evident among the designs, which usually consist of no more than a cross or the person’s initials. Generally, then, animal symbolism among Nage finds expression for the most part in verbal media, including commonly rehearsed cosmological ideas and traditional narratives as well as conventional metaphors. More on “Metaphor”: Some Analytical Distinctions Both linguists and anthropologists have used “metaphor” in several different ways. For present purposes, a major contrast concerns, on the one hand, “conventional metaphor,” standard expressions encountered in everyday speech and exemplified by English “snake in the grass,” and, on the other, what has been called “conceptual metaphor” (Lakoff and Johnson 1980; Kövecses 2010). Conceptual metaphors are general themes reflected in individual metaphors. These are discernible in all languages and some would appear to be universal. Like the English example just employed, Nage animal metaphors applied to humans manifest the conceptual metaphor “people are animals” (Kövecses 2010, 153, 282, 342), or “humans = animals.” This of course is never explicitly stated by Nage, nor often by anglophones, and, as a conceptual metaphor, it is of course distinct from the scientific identification of Homo sapiens, along with other primates, as members of a more inclusive taxon labelled “animal” (see Forth 2016). Anthropologists may notice that “people are animals” inverts a central proposition of “neo-animism,” part of a recent “ontological turn” (Holbraad and Pedersen 2017), according to which, for members of some small-scale societies at least, “animals are people.” Within this latter framework, moreover, the first proposition might well

12

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 13

be construed as a product of a contrasting ontology known as “naturalism” (sensu Descola 2013) – another issue I rejoin in later chapters. Nage animal metaphors reveal other conceptual metaphors, for example, “having sex = eating (and sex = food),” “male sexual exploits = hunting” (see Nos. 125, 353), and “honesty = straightness” (Nos. 62, 144, 206). These too reveal how connections linguists have uncovered in English metaphors are equally discernible in Nage – a finding of the present study that raises important questions about how far themes identified as conceptual metaphors are culturally specific as opposed to possessing a broader basis in panhuman experience or cognition. Several pairs of terms have been used to distinguish the two parts of a metaphor, in the present case the animal and the non-animal to which an animal metaphor refers. Among the most important are “source” and “target,” developed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980) in the exploration of conceptual metaphor. As the term suggests, “source” defines the domain that supplies concepts and terms used to talk about a “target,” that is, the topic of discourse or the implicit reference of the metaphor – most often human beings in the case of animal metaphors. Linguists thus talk about items from the source domain being “mapped onto” the target domain. “Source” and “target” are also serviceable in analyzing specific conventional metaphors, though in this context the terms admit further distinctions. Thus, where “animal” is the source, the sub-source, as it were, is a specific animal (a dog, rat, or snake), further specified as the “vehicle” of the metaphor. At the same time, “vehicle” can be used, more specifically, to describe a specific animal revealing particular qualities or involved in a specific action – our eponymous “urinating dog” again. Also pertaining to the source domain is what Dirven (1994) calls the “image” or “stereotype” of the entity named in the vehicle. With regard to animal metaphors, these terms describe the knowledge of the empirical animal possessed by a specific ethno-linguistic group. As the Nage corpus reveals, such knowledge derives both from experience of the natural species and, albeit in a far lesser degree, from quite specific utilitarian and symbolic values particular animals have for people. For example, several Nage monkey metaphors reflect the status of monkeys as creatures that do great damage to crops, a component of the animal’s metaphorical image one would not expect to find in European monkey metaphors. But an important qualification is in order for, as the Nage corpus makes clear, it is doubtful whether metaphorical animals possess a single, unitary image since the same animal

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

13

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 14

can appear in multiple metaphors reflecting extremely various attributes of the animal in question and, therefore, quite diverse motivations for individual metaphors.2 With regard to the “target” domain, a further specification, corresponding to the “vehicle” subsumed by a source, is what has been called the “tenor” (Richards 1936). Thus, where the target is human beings, the “tenor” might be a person behaving in a particular way. However, given the rather abstruse appearance of “tenor” in this context, I prefer simply to speak of the referent of a metaphor, meaning its accepted meaning or usual interpretation. On the other hand, I have found “vehicle” useful to retain, in part because its general sense accords with the original Greek sense of “metaphor” as something involving a “transfer” (namely, from the source to the target domain). Normally, the target of a metaphor is more abstract than the source, which is therefore typically less abstract (Kövecses 2010, 7, who employs “life” and “journey” as examples of target and source in English metaphor). A variant view has metaphor talking about less familiar things, the target domain, in terms pertaining to something better known, the source (Lakoff and Johnson 1980, 144, 156). How far these generalizations apply to animals and humans may be debatable, not least because humans might be expected to know themselves rather better than they do non-human animals. Nevertheless, where Nage employ animal behaviours (a dog urinating) to describe human behaviours (someone acting inconstantly or ineffectually), typically the act that is more specific, discrete, and manifest, or “much more concrete and graspable” (Fernandez 1986, 8), does indeed belong to the source domain. As regards metaphors that refer to humans, it is also worth emphasizing that, belonging to the target domain, the referent is not the person to whom a term or expression is applied but some form of human action or behaviour, situation, way of doing things, and so on, which the metaphor – or a socially situated speaker by way of the metaphor – attributes to a specific human subject. Expressed otherwise, while calling someone a urinating dog employs “dog” as the source (or more specifically the vehicle), the target is not the entire person but qualities of certain people that are seen to resemble certain qualities of dogs. As this specification should indicate, metaphor involves not identical qualities equally present in both (animal) source and (human) target but, rather, an asserted similarity. And as has often been argued, rather than passively reflecting pre-existing resemblances, metaphors highlight specific similarities or connections between things that might not otherwise

14

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 15

have been noticed, a property leading some authors to speak of metaphors “creating realities” (Lakoff and Johnson 1980, 156). At the same time, regardless of how one is to understand “creativity” in metaphor (see Black 1993, 35–8), this does not mean that conventional metaphors employing animals are not thoroughly grounded in empirical properties of the creatures concerned, including properties that are available to human perception everywhere. Indeed, as the Nage corpus demonstrates, physical and behavioural features of particular animals, far more than any other factor, inform the motivation of individual metaphors. Motivation rests on specific components of the source domain that are comparable and appropriate to components of the target domain. Features shared by both domains have been called the “grounds” of a metaphor (e.g., Miller 1993, 398; Glucksberg and Keysar 1993, 407; cf. “intermediaries,” Sapir 1977, 6). But what is important for motivation is that these features are recognizable (at least in principle). Metaphors are instances of symbolic thought and action, and in animal metaphors it is of course animals that appear as symbols (or vehicles) for other things. Following a long-standing distinction, “symbols” differ from “signs’ – or at least signs that are not “natural” (Leach 1976) – insofar as signs are based in arbitrary convention. To take an obvious example, as a linguistic sign, the English word “dog” bears no necessary relation to the category denoted, which is just as adequately represented by French chien or Nage lako. In contrast, symbolic relations are in some measure always motivated, which is to say determined or delimited by some property of the symbol, which for conventional metaphors means some property of the vehicle. This is especially clear with animal metaphors, where a quality of the animal is generally accepted as similar to some attribute of the non-animal referent. Thus a person who exhibits notable cunning can be described as a “sly fox” or simply a “fox” (and her or his victims as being “foxed”) by virtue of observable habits of foxes that are comparable to certain human propensities and behaviours, whereas an attribution of cunning or slyness to a pig, horse, or chicken would normally be out of the question. For the moment, I leave out of account whether foxes really are cunning, or cunning in the same ways as are some humans – or, indeed, why attractive women are also called foxes. However, employing this same example, it should be remarked that motivations, like symbolic relations generally, are always partial and selective, so features or aspects of an animal that lend themselves to metaphorical de-

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

15

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 16

ployment tend to be highly specific. Hence someone called a fox would not be expected to have a long bushy tail or to prey on chickens, and a person would not normally be called a fox simply because he or she had red hair or followed an exclusively carnivorous diet, although these are certainly attributes of foxes. Even where resemblances seem obvious, the constituent similarity between animals and humans essential to metaphors is not always a matter of direct, empirically observable continuity. Often the identity is indirect, specifically a function of analogy wherein similarity resides in the relation of an animal to something else and the relation of a person to something else again. Thus, when Nage call people lacking houses of their own “chickens without a coop” (No. 265), they do not allude to any direct resemblance between chickens and humans or even houses and coops; rather, the metaphor reflects the formula “chicken: coop:: human: house” (where the colon means “is to,” and the double colon means “as”). Of course, one might ask: Why do Nage not say “buffalo without a corral” or “monkey without a tree”? Actually, in other metaphors they very nearly do so (see, e.g., “buffalo that wrecks its enclosure,” No. 13), or at any rate they compare the relation of humans and houses with relations between these animals and their characteristic places of habitation. This observation bears on the quite extensive occurrence of synonymity in Nage animal metaphors, where expressions employing different animals have much the same meaning (see chapter 8). But, otherwise, the use of one animal rather than another, although certainly supported by empirical or utilitarian considerations – chicken coops are kept inside or otherwise close to houses – attests to the selectivity of metaphors and, by the same token, to their partial arbitrariness. As will become apparent, Nage animal metaphors often reflect a close and accurate observation of animal forms and habits, and some Nage are notably adept at identifying relations of analogy in their metaphors. But for the moment I wish to stress that motivation in metaphor can be various. In some expressions, only a single animal could fully serve the apparent metaphorical purpose, while in others the selection appears more random. Also, whereas physical properties of particular animals are very often fundamental, in a minority of instances other values, for example an animal’s mythological significance or the specific ways Nage make practical use of an animal – thus cultural factors – are of equal or greater importance. Further qualifying the

16

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 17

generally empirical basis of animal metaphors, in yet other instances the selection of an animal appears to be largely or partly motivated by qualities of the animal’s name. These include names contributing to prosodic effects, where the animal name matches other components of a longer expression by virtue of rhyme, alliteration (repetition of consonants), or assonance (vowel correspondence). Familiar English examples include: “drunk as a skunk” and “loose as a goose” (or “loosey goosey”), exemplifying rhyme; “copycat” and “talk turkey,” revealing alliteration; and “monkey’s uncle,” demonstrating assonance. With other examples – e.g., “pig ignorant,” “loveydovey,” and “eager beaver” – prosodic effects are clearly significant yet have apparently influenced the adjective more than the animal category, which is then motivated instead by observed or attributed features of the creature itself. By contrast, with “loose as a goose” and “copycat” there is no evident basis for the particular selection other than phonological features of the animal’s name. With few exceptions, Nage animal vehicles appear not to be determined entirely by prosodic considerations, and usually some empirical basis can be found for the animal’s selection. Nevertheless, as will be seen, prosodic effects have had a substantial influence on the conventional form of a variety of metaphorical expressions. A final issue concerns the classic contrast of metaphor and simile. Like “metonymy,” “synecdoche,” and other terms, “simile” has often been treated as a variety of a more generally conceived “metaphor.” When distinguished, however, simile denotes expressions where a resemblance between source and target is made explicit (although the nature of the resemblance is usually not specified or defined), as in “like a dog pissing at the edge of a path” or, to cite two English examples, “to eat like a horse” or “fat as a pig.” By contrast, with metaphor the similarity is implicit – as when a fat, greedy, or illmannered person is simply called a “pig.” Exemplifying an intermediate possibility are expressions like “greedy fat pig” and “sly fox,” where a person is identified as an animal but specifically with respect to a single quality indicated by the adjective. The existence of such intermediate and thus ambiguous cases reveals one difficulty with the contrast, and indeed a general finding of this book is that many Nage animal metaphors can be expressed either as a metaphor (where a phrase describing an animal is simply applied to a person) or as a simile (where, by way of terms translatable as “like” or “as,” someone is characterized

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

17

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 18

as resembling an animal). To be sure, some animal metaphors appear to be expressed only as metaphors (e.g., “chickens of god” and “Nage dog,” both discussed in chapter 2) while others are more often expressed as similes and many appear to be used exclusively in this way. However, owing to this variation it is impractical to categorize Nage animals either as strict metaphors or as strict similes, and I have therefore not attempted to do so. As much to the point, Nage themselves do not distinguish “simile” and “metaphor,” categories equally included in pata péle, a Nage concept discussed in the next chapter. Apart from issues of practicality and the absence of a comparable indigenous contrast, the distinction between metaphor and simile can be understood as a matter of degree rather than of kind. Especially when one accepts that conventional references to human beings as animals do not mean they really are animals – a qualification Nage themselves recognize – and hence that metaphors express not an absolute but a partial identity, or a similarity, between humans and animals, then the contrast pertains to how explicitly this similarity (typically an island in a sea of differences) is verbally represented. By the same token, the explicit statement of resemblance definitive of simile hides a difference since someone described as “like a snake,” for example, is in most respects obviously nothing like a snake. At the same time, such a proposition is sufficiently distinguished from a statement like “a falcon is like a hawk” by the fact that falcons and hawks are both types of birds, thus items from the same domain, and moreover by the fact that the resemblance indicated is not only entirely general but is also offered non-figuratively, that is, as a “literal” truth (Ortony 1993, 346– 7; see also the virtually synonymous statement “a falcon is a ‘kind of’ hawk,” which in English, at least, ambiguously implies either close resemblance or class inclusion). Metaphor and simile, therefore, can be treated as points on a “continuum” of explicitness (Sapir 1977, 7–8). In a similar way, simile has been characterized as the “basis of metaphor” (Jones 1948, 105), and metaphor as “abbreviated simile” (Miller 1993, 356). But regardless of whether the encompassing term is taken to be simile (as the latter two authors might suggest) or metaphor (as the continuum model might suggest), the two things can be seen as intrinsically connected. Anyone taking this view is evidently in good company, for it was first proposed by Aristotle in The Poetics. Rather more recently, the position has been challenged by Boyer (1994, 53) on the grounds that metaphor (saying a person “is” a [non-human] animal) and simile (saying that a person “is like” an animal) are cognitively different. By this he means that human thought

18

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 19

processes the two propositions differently, as saying a human is a nonhuman is counterintuitive and arresting in a way that describing a human as resembling a non-human is not. However, this difference is qualified or reduced insofar as the identification of two things entailed in metaphor in a stricter sense (as when a person is simply described as a “snake” or a “hawk”) is never accepted as entirely factual or straightforwardly true. On the other hand, even where likeness is always explicitly articulated, as in the well-known English similes “eating like a horse” and “as free as a bird,” such statements must themselves be taken metaphorically. At best, they are instances of hyperbole, another variety of metaphor, where one degree of something or some quality is substituted for another. Thus while he may eat a lot and quite often, a man who eats like a horse does not really eat as much as a horse or as continuously as a horse, nor does he consume the same food. Similarly, the freedom of someone “as free as a bird” is radically different from a bird’s freedom. Grounded largely in a bird’s ability to fly (an ability humans palpably do not possess), this expression entails an analogy, whereby the bird’s character as a creature that is not earthbound is compared to the circumstances of a person relatively unbound by obligations or restrictions that are not physical but social. These points aside, the fundamental identity of metaphor and simile gains empirical support from Nage animal metaphors, in which humans are often identically linked with the same non-human animal both in explicit statements of resemblance and in expressions in which the similarity is implicit, without this affecting either the meaning or the motivation. In this way, the study of Nage animal metaphors, focusing on actual usage and variation in usage, makes a significant contribution to the study of metaphor in general. In a similar vein, it is worth stressing that many Nage animal metaphors involve metonymy as well as metaphor in the more specific sense. For example, “buffalo mounting a dog” (No. 10), referring to a higher-ranking man who marries or cohabits with a lower-ranking woman, employs the sexual act to describe something larger – the entire conjugal relationship. Similarly, “rat above” (No. 185), referring to something that distracts people’s attention, uses just one of many possible things that might prove distracting to describe any instance or situation of distraction, while in the combination of “quail” and “dove” (see Nos. 393, 402) two categories of birds that do damage to crops are employed to talk about a larger variety of birds that do so, a pattern I have previously described as “dual metonymy.” On the other hand, the use

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

19

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 20

of “buffalo” and “dog” to distinguish people of higher and lower rank involves external analogy (a concept further discussed in chapter 2) and is a straightforward instance of metaphor in the stricter sense. Methods and Methodology All metaphors discussed in this book were recorded during twenty research trips to the Nage region beginning in 1984 and extending to 2018; in total, time spent in the field was approximately three years. Initially I encountered animal metaphors incidentally in the context of general ethnography and learning the Nage language. In the 1990s, however, and partly in connection with investigations of Nage indigenous religion and spiritual cosmology, I developed a more sustained interest in Nage animal symbolism. Later in that decade I also began exploring Nage folk zoology and came to appreciate certain connections, but also important differences, between Nage symbolic representations of animals – in metaphor and elsewhere – and other ways Nage talked and thought about animals. All this contributed to my most recent book (Forth 2016). But while that work cites examples of animal metaphors, as did an earlier monograph on Nage relations with birds (Forth 2004a), it does not treat the topic systematically or comprehensively.3 This is the task of the present work. As the foregoing should suggest, I first encountered animal metaphors in a “naturalistic” way (sensu Hammersley and Atkinson 2007) as a “participant observer.” In contrast, my later initiated study of animal metaphors required far more use of directive questioning. Directive questioning admits degrees. Among the least directive varieties is free-listing, where informants are asked to name instances of a particular item, or a category. Thus, after I had recorded one or more metaphors employing a particular animal (e.g., “dog”), I asked people to list orally all metaphorical expressions they knew that included that animal’s name, an exercise aided considerably by the existence of a Nage term corresponding to English “metaphor” (see chapter 2). Given the reliance of this method on informant recall, it is reasonable to ask how complete the corpus of animal metaphors I employ in this study might be. I do not claim the corpus is absolutely complete. However, free-listing and other questioning about metaphors is likely to produce a more exhaustive return than is exclusive reliance on opportunistic observation of metaphors in use (as methodological “naturalism” would seem to require). And while

20

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 21

there are almost certainly animal metaphors I have missed, the 566 expressions recorded below are very likely to be representative of Nage animal metaphors in general. Once I had established translations of specific metaphors – like “a dog pissing at the edge of a path” – I was able to enquire more directly about their applications. And, of course, once I had become aware of given metaphors – either from observation or questioning – I became more alert to their occurrence in speech and thus in the context of particular activities and social relationships. This frequently gave rise to further questioning and discussion with Nage informants, or “commentators” as I often refer to them below. Questioning was conducted partly in the Indonesian national language (Bahasa Indonesia), a language in which I have been fluent since the mid-1970s in connection with fieldwork on the neighbouring island of Sumba (see, e.g., Forth 1981), and partly in Nage, specifically the dialect spoken in central Nage in which I have become increasingly competent since 1984. Virtually all Nage speak Indonesian, and although fluency varies with age and gender (male and younger Nage generally being more fluent), it would nowadays be difficult to engage in ethnographic conversations without some facility in the national language. Indeed, as is common among bilinguals, Nage often switch between languages in mid-speech, and when asking about named categories or expressions informants would normally first respond by offering Indonesian translations. An ethnographer obviously requires more than translations, and a large part of my effort was directed towards discovering typical Nage uses and understandings of their metaphors, including not only what they referred to but also why users thought a particular animal or animal behaviour was comparable to or provided an appropriate metaphor for something human (e.g., a corresponding human behaviour). In other words, I was searching for Nage views on motivation. Knowledge of local interpretations, including both referents and recognized motivations, was not gained only from explicit questioning or discussions I myself initiated: often, Nage spontaneously proffered explanations of why a particular animal, or an animal acting in a specific way, was appropriate to a specific metaphor, especially after they had gained a better understanding of the purposes of my study. Interpretation and motivation are of course not the same thing. Especially in semiological approaches, where symbolic entities are construed as part of a systematic code, “interpretation” commonly refers to what a symbol means

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

21

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 22

or “stands for,” or what, in regard to Nage animal metaphors, I call the referent. Referents, or interpretations in this sense, can be investigated by eliciting metalinguistic statements, comparable to informant definitions of any word or phrase – for example, “‘bachelor’ means an unmarried man,” which is comparable to “‘rat’ means a despicable person.” At the same time, even where speakers are unable to articulate a referent, these can partly be inferred from observing how metaphors are used – a normal part of any language learning. Motivation, by contrast, concerns features of a metaphor’s specific source or vehicle. In the present study, these would be features of an animal’s form or habits that suit it to the specific, typically human target – or, otherwise expressed, features of the animal that illuminate the metaphor’s meaning. In most cases I found Nage commentators themselves had definite, and moreover completely plausible, ideas about what motivated a particular metaphor. But since my investigation of animal metaphors was part of a larger study of Nage relations with non-human animals, insight into motivation was also available from concomitant investigations of Nage folk zoological knowledge and the value of specific animals in Nage life. Speakers of any language will often be able to identify the meaning of a metaphor without being able to say how or why it “works.” Think, for example, of English metaphors like “eight (or three or ten) sheets to the wind,” describing someone who is extremely drunk. In addition, speakers’ statements about motivation can appear unconvincing, ad hoc, or contrived – as sometimes can local accounts of what metaphors refer to. It goes without saying that, as with any ethnographic topic, it is necessary to discuss metaphors with a variety of people, and the need becomes all the more apparent when informant interpretations appear idiosyncratic or highly personal. For example, one man talking about the metaphor “snake in an orchard,” generally applied to an inactive person or someone who rarely leaves home (chapter 6, No. 422), interpreted this as referring specifically to a person who has been banished to a particular place and who therefore does not associate with other people. As I happened to know beforehand, this man himself had been ostracized by kin and neighbours some years previously, owing to his son having committed incest with his sister (the man’s daughter), and when I spoke to him he was living in a field hut some distance from his village. I would not consider his interpretation as inauthentic; however, it was clearly not the sole interpretation nor was it especially representative.

22

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 23

As even this example may suggest, where native speakers are able to comment on either meaning or motivation, this can contribute significantly to any ethnographic understanding of a metaphor. In fact, even if one had a perfect command of the language, a comprehensive understanding of a community’s metaphors would be impossible without recourse to informants’ statements about both their referents and motivations. Attention to actual usage is important (cf. Victor Turner’s [1967] “operational meaning”), in part because this may reveal inconsistencies with informant exegesis, but – as this last qualification reveals – it is never sufficient in and of itself, a point that gains special force in regard to metaphors reflecting particularly complex or elaborate constructions (see, e.g., No. 417, incorporating the bird named kuku raku, the previously mentioned waterhen). As should be expected, Nage are able to interpret some metaphors better than others. Also not surprisingly, I found people could more readily comment on metaphors used in prosaic speech and applied to distinctive physical or behavioural features of individual people (e.g., expressions comparable to English metaphors like “rat,” “pig,” “snake-in-the grass”) than on animal metaphors contained in proverbs or songs – in other words, in poetic idioms possessing a more diffuse quality and often pertaining to more abstract features of the human condition. Such variation, however, does not merely reflect the nature of the genre, for there is also the possibility of what Turner (1967) called “blocked exegesis,” where people may be unwilling to reveal negative aspects of symbolic usages. Apart from aspects that participants may think reflect badly on the community (Turner’s main illustration), blocked exegesis might also concern, for example, sexual meanings that people might find embarrassing and thus be unwilling to speak about openly. Although the assessment is necessarily subjective, Nage appeared generally far better able to give an account of their animal metaphors than would many English-speakers, and this was most notable when discussing motivations. Whereas Nage are usually able to give a cogent account of specific animal features that inform particular metaphors, it is unlikely that many modern English speakers would be able, for example, to say what features of weasels fit usages like “weasel word” or “to weasel out”; to provide an analysis of usages like “catbird seat” and “brass monkey”; or even to give an articulate account of why someone might be called a “pig.” The apparent difference is most readily explained by the unfamiliarity of most modern and especially

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

23

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 24

urban anglophones with animals and animal behaviour, both domestic and wild. But regardless of informant capabilities it should not be supposed that local accounts fully explain the metaphors. For one thing, they do not reveal how, in some instances, the same animal metaphor has become associated with two or more quite different local interpretations. Therefore, even where informants are able to provide substantial accounts of factors illuminating the motivation of metaphors, it is always necessary to observe metaphors in use and to draw on wider ethnographic knowledge that may support, qualify, or contradict such accounts. And even then, one cannot of course claim to have attained perfect knowledge of a metaphor. In an essay published over forty years ago, Sperber (1975, 33–4, 48, 63) argued that, unlike words in natural languages, “symbols,” under which he included conventional metaphor, do not have “meaning” and that interpretations of symbols – by which he mostly meant their “translations” or referents – are not true interpretations but are themselves symbolic statements and so only extend the symbolism. In the same context he similarly described motivations of symbols as part of the symbolism they seem to explain and, therefore, as symbolic rather than “meta-symbolic” (33). However, in contrast to other symbols (like material objects or ritual actions), which often are not locally interpreted, conventional metaphors are components of natural languages and so are in many respects similar to single words and standard idioms. Thus it is not surprising that, just as speakers of a language are usually able to provide a gloss of a word for “dog,” say, so Nage are usually able to say what “a dog pissing at the edge of a path” refers to and are, furthermore, very often able to comment on the similarity between the canine behaviour and comparable human behaviours they see as motivating the metaphor. Things are quite different, for example, with decorated sacrificial posts or acts performed at such posts – both components of major Nage ritual performances – which obviously cannot be glossed or paraphrased as can words, and whose “meanings” Nage usually find difficult or impossible to articulate. Even if interpretations of symbols of all sorts (including informant statements about motivation) were only to extend the symbolism as Sperber claims, investigating these would still form an essential part of their study, a point that has special relevance for conventional metaphor. And in fact, as I have discovered from investigating how Nage themselves understand their animal metaphors, conventional metaphors appear to differ quite substan-

24

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 25

tially from other forms of symbolism employing animals (a matter I consider in greater detail in later chapters). Organization Chapter 2 explores an indigenous Nage concept of metaphor and locates conventional metaphors in relation to anthropological uses of “metaphor” regularly encountered in the analysis of animal symbolism, especially since the mid-twentieth century. In the succeeding five chapters I then discuss in turn each of the individual expressions that compose the Nage corpus. Chapter 3 deals with domestic mammals, chapter 4 with wild mammals, chapter 5 with birds, chapter 6 with other non-mammals, and chapter 7 with insects and other invertebrates. Some readers may question an ordering of a non-Western society’s animal metaphors according to phylogenetic categories employed in international (or scientific) zoology. I do so for three reasons. First, Nage themselves possess folk-taxa, specifically “life forms” (sensu Berlin 1992), that generally correspond to “mammal,” “bird,” “snake,” and “fish” (Forth 2016) and thus reasonably approximate the “classes” (e.g., Mammalia, Aves) and other taxa of biological systematics. Second, the procedure replicates that followed in my 2016 book and so facilitates coordination with this earlier work. And third, ordering animal metaphors with reference to an internationally recognized scheme of animal taxa best facilitates cross-cultural comparison. In all chapters, single animals are identified with an English name (e.g., “dog”), the Nage name, and a Latinate taxon (or “scientific name”). Under each animal name, individual metaphors are then arranged alphabetically in accordance with their English translations. The metaphors are first given in English translation, followed by the original Nage expression, and then by a brief summary of the recognized referent or referents. After this I include a commentary, expanding on the translation and discussing how the metaphor is employed, details of its motivation, and further matters that illuminate the Nage usage. In treating issues of translation, I sometimes refer to languages closely related to Nage, especially other languages in the “Ngadha-Lio” group (Wurm and Hattori 1981), such as Endenese and Lio (spoken to the east of Nage) and Ngadha (spoken immediately to the west). Also mentioned in the commentaries are comparisons with conventional metaphors found in

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

25

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 26

English, Indonesian, and other languages, including other eastern Indonesian languages. As explained, discussion of motivation draws in large part from informant exegesis, and where my analysis, based on observation of usage, more general ethnography pertaining to Nage practice and knowledge of particular animals, or information drawn from international zoology replaces, augments, or qualifies local exegesis, this is made clear. As noted, animal metaphor is found not only in expressions referring to people but also in the names of human body parts, plants, artefacts, other animals, and so on. Where these occur, such expressions are listed at the end of individual animal entries (e.g., “dog,” “rat,” “crow,” “viper”), thus after the majority of metaphors that refer to human actions, characters, and the like (and thus qualifying the otherwise alphabetical ordering of entries). In each case, I begin with metaphorical animal names (e.g., “buffalo cricket” denoting a large kind of cricket), thereafter listing plant names and then names of artefacts and objects. Including informant exegeses, commentaries are provided in the same way as for other metaphorical usages, and where possible I provide scientific (Latinate) identifications for the plant or animal referents. To facilitate cross-referencing, metaphors are numbered consecutively throughout chapters 3 to 7. Drawing on discussion of individual usages in the preceding five chapters, chapter 8 explores general features of Nage animal metaphors, including the extent to which their motivation is attributable to observation and empirical knowledge of physical features and behaviours of given species, as opposed to human uses served by an animal or an animal’s symbolic value in myth, cosmology, and so on, or lexical features of animal names. This discussion produces an important result for it reveals how the metaphorical use of animal categories in fact has little connection with other “symbolic” uses of the same categories and also less than might be expected with the animals’ utilitarian value. Another comparative issue explored in chapter 8 concerns variation in the metaphorical use made of different animal life forms (mammals, birds, and so on). As will be seen, in regard to the number of metaphors employing each animal category – mostly folk-generics like “cat,” “crocodile,” “crow,” and “cockroach” – Nage make more use of mammals than they do of any other kind of animal, even though the number of individual bird and invertebrate categories employed metaphorically is considerably larger. They also make far more use of domestic than of wild mammals. And in these respects, Nage use of animals as metaphors corresponds in some interesting

26

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 27

ways with what is found in English usage – a finding that, as I show, ultimately contributes to understanding the prominence of animals in general as vehicles of conventional metaphor. The final chapter, chapter 9, then turns to questions of what Nage metaphors reveal about their relations with non-human animals; how animal metaphors may reflect Nage ideas about and expectations of fellow humans; and, in a closely related vein, how the metaphors express social values in regard to varieties of human character and behaviour, and, thus, the place of animal metaphor in social intercourse and social relationships. Finally, this chapter deals with matters of comparative ontology by addressing the question of whether or how far Nage animal metaphors provide evidence for a distinct way of thinking about continuities and discontinuities between humans and non-human animals, and, particularly, how far Nage might, in this respect, depart from the ontological “naturalism” some anthropologists have proposed as the definitive feature of Western thought.

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

27

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 28

2 Metaphors and “Metaphor” in Human-Animal Relations

For some anthropologists “metaphor” has become almost a dirty word. In particular, participants in the previously mentioned “ontological turn,” including proponents of a “neo-animism” (a coinage of Graham Harvey 2006), regard statements by members of non-Western societies identifying humans and non-human entities not as metaphor but as literal beliefs, and perhaps even experiences, definitive of a distinct ontology, a way not only of thinking but of “being.” Exemplifying this position is Ingold’s criticism of analyses of hunter-gatherer peoples who speak of their relation with their environment in terms of a relationship between “parent” (the environment) and “child” (the people). Whereas others (e.g., Bird-David 1999) have interpreted such expressions as metaphors that use social relations to “make sense of,” conceptualize, model, or construct human experience of nature (a position recently defended by Descola 2013, 250–1), Ingold asserts that they are no such thing. Rather, reference to the forest, for example, as a bountiful parent reveals not a metaphor but an “actuality,” “a moment in the unfolding of relations between humans and non-human agencies and entities in the environment” (Ingold 2011, 45). And in verbally speaking of their environment as “parents” and “beg[ging] the forest to provide food as would a human parent,” Ingold further claims, food-collectors are simply giving voice to an identity between human relations with (and within) nature and relations within (or with) society, and are, by the same token, expressing their “real unity” (50, emphasis added) – a formulation facilitating Ingold’s attempt to dissolve the dualism of “nature” and “society” (or “culture”).

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 29

In another place, Ingold (2011, 50) suggests that, in these instances, “the metaphor ‘forest is as [sic] parent’ could just as well be expressed as ‘parent is as [sic] forest,’” adding that the “force of the metaphor is to reveal the underlying ontological equivalence of human and non-human components of the environment as agencies of nurturance.” At least as far as conventional metaphor goes, this is questionable for metaphors are characteristically asymmetrical – so that describing a person as an animal does not mean the animal can equally be called a “person” or that it is ever conceptualized as such. Although Ingold’s claim would suggest that he does subscribe to some application of “metaphor” (129, 283, 284, 285, 361), his otherwise censorious approach to anthropological employment of the concept refers specifically or primarily to hunter-gatherers and, on that ground alone, might be considered irrelevant, or less relevant, to cultivators like the Nage (even though they hunt as well). On the other hand, Ingold’s approach generally suggests a more inclusive relevance (see, e.g., his critique of Gudeman’s [1986] interpretation of Western and non-Western “models of livelihood” [Ingold 2011, 44–5], where “model” appears largely equivalent to “metaphor”) and even a view that, in their allegedly non-metaphoric way of thinking, hunter-gatherers have got things right (see, e.g., Ingold 2011, 76; also Ingold 2016, 308). To generalize on this kind of ontological pluralism (Holbraad and Pedersen 2017, 156), metaphor is treated by proponents as an artefact of what has been called “naturalism” (sensu Descola 2013), a mode of thinking about and experiencing the world represented as exclusively characteristic of Western societies and principally contrasted to a revamped notion of “animism.” Especially as I am not arguing that Nage animal metaphors, or metaphors of any sort, demarcate or typify an entire cosmology or pervasive ontology, I am not entirely unsympathetic to Ingold’s argument. I would also question the social determinism or constructivism against which he speaks and would do so, moreover, not just with reference to hunter-gatherer cosmology but also in respect to human thought and behaviour in general. However, since my topic is conventional metaphor, standard forms of verbal expression, it is unclear how far we are talking about the same thing. In several respects, Ingold’s attack appears to be directed primarily at “metaphor” as employed as an analytic, interpretative, or observer’s category – or what has sometimes been called “unconscious” metaphor (Sandor 1986, 112) or “literal metaphors” (West 2007, 63, 83, citing Cochetti 1995) and which, as I explain below, can

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

29

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 30

also be distinguished as “Jakobsonian” metaphor. On the other hand, in questioning whether a hunter-gatherer practice of addressing a forest as a parent can be considered “metaphorical,” Ingold (2011, 44) asserts that “this is evidently not an interpretation that the people would make themselves” – as if to suggest that something can be called metaphor only insofar as its users recognize it as such. Interestingly, another ontological pluralist who takes exception to anthropological deployments of metaphor, Viveiros de Castro (2004, 13–16), makes virtually the same assertion when, in reference to Urban’s (1996) interpretation of indigenous South American ideas concerning jaguars and tapirs as “metaphoric,” he states that he (Viveiros de Castro) “could hazard a guess” that the people themselves “probably do not share this interpretation” (Viveiros de Castro 2004, 14). One might enquire why neither of these authors, or the writers they cite, apparently ever asked the people themselves. But in any case, and despite Ingold’s use of “evidently,” no specific evidence is provided for either of these claims. The more important point, however – and one I need to stress – is that, in regard to their conventional animal metaphors, Nage do indeed advance such interpretations. That is, when they describe somebody as a “dog,” or “like a dog,” they are explicitly not saying that the person really is a dog. In other words, they describe such verbally articulated relations between a human and a non-human animal as expressly metaphorical. And they are able to do so by invoking a named concept corresponding to European “metaphor.” “Metaphor” in Nage All of the usages I discuss in this book are instances of the Nage category pata péle, a term people equate with Indonesian ibarat, “simile, metaphor,” and which Nage with a better knowledge of the national language recognize as synonymous with Dutch-derived metafora (“metaphor”). Sometimes Nage describe their conventional metaphors as bholo ‘ana, “just talk, only (a way of) speaking,” an evaluation signalling recognition of the fact that a person described as an animal, say, is ultimately not an animal (ana wa) but a human being (kita ata). However, bholo ‘ana applies not only to speech recognized as figurative but equally to non-figurative statements that are not backed by evidence or that pertain to future actions that have yet to be carried out. Hence the more exact designation of statements that are distinguishably metaphorical remains pata péle.

30

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 31

Pata péle comprises the nominal term pata, modified by péle (adjectives always follow nouns in Nage). In contrast to words referring to language or speech in general (e.g., punu, “to speak, state”; sa punu, “way of talking, language”; and ‘ana, dialectal rana, “to state, tell, relate”), pata denotes a specific statement, either one that has already been made or one that will be made. Tau pata (tau, “to do, make”) thus means “to create, compose” lyrics or a speech or, less formally “to make a statement.” The term further refers to a form of words in regular use – for example, an expression regularly employed in formal ritual language or standard phrases used in orations. Apart from these uses, other recorded senses of pata include “(spoken) decision, agreement, or understanding”; a “quotation (a record of what someone has said),” an express “opinion” (contrasting to ola he, a thought yet to be openly expressed) or “position (on a matter)”; “information,” “report” or “(piece of) news” (as in edi pata, “to bring news, convey information,” and pata mona dhu ena, “word has not reached there”), and a “matter, topic of conversation.” As a reference to fixed expressions, pata is a component of several terms mostly specifying contexts in which the former are typically employed. These include: pata teke, lyrics of chants that accompany circle-dancing (teke); pata joki, planting songs; pata kasi, songs of mourning; and pata dhéro, songs performed while circle-dancing during annual pugilistic competitions named etu (Forth 1998). Another compound of pata denoting lyrics is pata néke, or, more completely, pata péle néke (also péle néke), which refers not to the context of a performance but to content. Meaning “to tease, deride, criticize (often in a cynical way),” néke as a modifier of pata describes lyrics of a variety of songs performed while planting and circle-dancing that are sung, in turn, by groups of men and women and that tease or deride members of the opposite sex. (The reciprocal character of these exchanges is emphasized in the related term papa néke, where papa expresses reciprocal action.) Such teasing or derision – which English term is the better translation varies with context – is very often of a sexual nature, and the human traits to which the phrases refer are typically oblique. As this should suggest, the language of pata néke, as of other performances classified as pata (planting songs, songs of mourning), is characteristically metaphorical, and a great many component phrases comprise animal metaphors. It therefore follows that statements (pata) contained in planting songs (pata joki), for example, equally comprise instances of pata péle, or metaphor. At the same time, Nage employ many more animal metaphors in everyday speech than they do in song.

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

31

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 32

As the qualifier of pata and therefore as a term specifying metaphorical language, péle has several related meanings, all involving the idea of separation and, more specifically, of placing a seal or partition between things. Among these are “to close or shut off, enclose” and “to keep something away (from something else),” as in péle bhada, “to shut a buffalo in” a corral or other confined area, and péle manu “to place a chicken inside a coop or cage” or, alternatively, “to keep chickens out” (of a garden, for example). Péle ae can mean “to close off or hold back a flow of water (ae),” as is done when constructing a dam or weir across a stream or river, while pe ngawu awu (where pe is a synonymous abbreviation of péle) describes a wooden or bamboo retainer used to hold earth in place at the lower edge of a sloping garden plot in order to prevent slippage or erosion. Similarly, péle zala (or pe zala) means “to block off ” a path or road (zala), usually by erecting a bamboo barricade. In other cases in which the sense of sealing or shutting off is equally present, péle has the additional sense of “protecting” something – as in péle (ko) angi, “to shut out wind,” “protect from the wind,” a function served by walls or vertical screens in a house or hut, or any sort of “windbreak.” More figuratively, the last phrase can mean to keep out or protect a place from various sorts of negative forces, either human or spiritual, while in much the same way péle ngai (ngai is “breath”) refers to thwarting another person’s efforts. In a more tangible vein, comparable usages include péle (ae) uza, “to keep out rain,” describing the function of dried palm boughs placed atop maize storage frames or a large banana leaf held above the head, and péle leza, “to keep out the sun,” describing a parasol or modern sunglasses. In other contexts – and often in the abbreviated form pe – péle refers more specifically to covering up or screening off in order to hide or conceal something. One example is pe ngia, “to hide the face,” an expression combined in parallelistic speech with nidi pasu, “to conceal the cheeks,” to form a standard expression referring to a quantity of goods, additional to the bridewealth, paid to a woman’s group in order to facilitate an illicit or undesirable marriage (e.g., where the relation between the two spouses is considered too close). The phrases imply that the payment serves as a screen between the two sides to a marriage – one might even say it creates the sides or creates a division, especially where a marriage might be conceived as occurring within a single group. Conceived as an act of separation (péle or pe), the payment can alternatively be interpreted as putting a distance between the spouses as

32

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 33

well as concealing the problematic aspects of their relationship. And a notion of protection is equally present insofar as less than correct marriages, like other improper acts or relationships that are not ritually neutralized, can result in illness, affliction, or other misfortune for the parties concerned. As should be clear from the foregoing, as the term for “metaphor,” pata péle can be understood as referring to a statement that separates, closes off, hides, or protects one thing from another – or, indeed, incorporates two or more of these meanings at the same time. As to what may be separated from what, an immediate inference is that this is an implicit, non-metaphorical statement reflecting the speaker’s intention and the referent (or interpretation) of the metaphor. And, in fact, Nage with whom I discussed this question agreed. As one man put it, what is péle (screened off, shut out, covered, or concealed) by metaphorical language is the speaker’s “true statement” (expressed in Indonesian as kata sebenarnya, “true or proper words”) or what cannot, or should not, “be expressed directly” (di omong langsung). Thus, to use the informant’s own example, instead of “directly” describing someone as possessing an “ugly, bad, or wicked character” (ngai zede ta’a ‘é’e) one might describe the person as being or behaving like a “dog (and) pig” (lako wawi, No. 86). If these statements have a familiar ring, this is probably because “direct” (Indonesian langsung) is often encountered as a synonym of “literal” or “non-figurative” in English writing on metaphor (e.g., Sandor 1986). Like the last example, the majority of animal metaphors Nage apply to people are negative or critical in tone, a fact that bears on their place in social intercourse and relationships (see chapter 9). Especially where metaphors convey a less than positive evaluation, metaphor in the Nage view renders socially more acceptable what otherwise would be less acceptable by “screening off ” or “covering” the speaker’s “true meaning” (as in the informant’s interpretation reported above). But this “screen” is further construed as “protecting” and “preserving” (two further senses of péle) the feelings of people referred to or addressed and, therefore, the relationship between speakers and human referents – another assessment of animal metaphors Nage themselves recognize. Both interpretations might initially appear paradoxical because the “true meaning” of metaphors is normally known both to the speaker and to the person spoken about or addressed – an open secret, one might say. Yet it hardly needs mentioning that, among humans generally (and perhaps more so among Indonesians than among Westerners), the way something is said can be more important than what is expressed, and speaking of something openly

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

33

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 34

can have quite different consequences from conveying a message by more covert, or “covered,” means. Of course, whether expressing a value pertaining to indirectness or focusing more specifically on protecting human sensibilities, local interpretations of pata péle are less applicable where animal metaphors refer to positively valued human traits. They also have no relevance for metaphors that serve as the sole names of plants, artefacts, or other animals. Indeed, regardless of their referents, Nage metaphors, like metaphor anywhere, cannot simply be a matter of employing a figurative expression where a direct or literal statement could have been used instead. For literal equivalents are not always available, and Nage use animal metaphors in conveying a variety of quite specific ideas, mostly about humans and human behaviour and character that cannot be so fully conveyed, or communicated so subtly or artfully, by other means. Ideas of separating, shutting off, sheltering, and concealing that are central to the Nage concept are also discernible in terms for “metaphor” in other eastern Indonesian languages. This holds not only for Ngadha and Lio, eponymous languages of the Ngadha-Lio group spoken, respectively, to the west and east of Nage and which contain terms virtually identical to Nage péle and pata péle,1 but also for Sikkanese, a member of the separate FloresLembata group of languages spoken in the far eastern part of Flores. Pareira and Lewis (1998) list Sikkanese patang-péleng or péleng-patang, expressions obviously comparable to Nage (or Ngadha-Lio) pata péle, as “proverb” (Indonesian peribahasa). They also gloss péle as “to go against” (Indonesian menyongsong; as in “to sail against the wind’), thereby suggesting the idea of something acting as a counterforce, like a dam or barricade. Immediately recalling two Nage usages described above, a similarly close correspondence is found in Kambera, spoken in the eastern part of the neighbouring island of Sumba, where kajangu, a word whose primary meaning is something used to cover and protect oneself from rain or sun – a large banana leaf or palm bough, for example – additionally refers to the pervasively metaphoric lexicon of Sumbanese ritual language, which, as I note in an earlier work, serves to “shelter or disguise that to which [speakers] obliquely refer” (Forth 1981, 19). In the same vein, Onvlee (1984, 136) glosses tamu kajangu, a name (tamu) used in place of the real name of a person of high rank, with Dutch beschuttingsnaam, which incorporates beschutten, “to shelter, screen” (from schut, “screen, fence, partition”), and is therefore semantically identical to German

34

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 35

Deckname (literally “cover name”), meaning “alias.” Of course, an alias or alternative name is not quite the same thing as a metaphor. Yet insofar as both involve substituting one term or phrase with another, it is not without interest that terms with the same meaning in Germanic languages should involve the same metaphor – of covering, shutting off, or sheltering something – as do terms for “metaphor” in languages of eastern Indonesia. In a way also comparable to eastern Indonesian representations of metaphor, the Ilongot people of the Philippines, speakers of another MalayoPolynesian language, characterize the metaphoric speech of adult men’s oratory as “crooked” speech, contrasting to the “straight” speech of ordinary discourse (Rosaldo 1980, 194, 199, 202). Here, too, metaphor is distinguished from literal language by “indirection” (198–9), a property obviously shared by Nage pata péle, or “speech that separates, covers, or hides.” And equally noteworthy is Rosaldo’s interpretation of Ilongot oratory as using metaphors to “hide … deeper meanings” (202). Much further afield, another view of metaphor comparable to that suggested by the Nage term is discernible among the Amerindian Cuna of Panama. Specifically, the Cuna idea of metaphor finds expression in forms of purpa (“soul, shadow”), including purpale, a word partly meaning “covertly, invisibly, incorporeally,” while purpar sunmakke, “to speak metaphorically,” more generally refers to “speaking in euphemisms or other indirect speech forms” (Howe 1977, 137). As Howe goes on to note, both metaphor and euphemism “share the quality of being hidden, at one remove.” He further suggests that, as a reference to metaphors, the best gloss of purpale may be “the hidden essence of things” (137), and later he speaks of “the secret or hidden quality of metaphor” (163). If this is correct, then the Cuna word would seem to refer to the meaning of a metaphor (the interpretation or referent), whereas Nage péle, understood as something that separates, closes off, or hides, applies more to the vehicle. Nevertheless, as Howe makes clear, for Cuna the process of metaphor involves an act of covering or concealing (and, by way of interpretation, eventually uncovering or revealing) just as it does for Nage. How widespread representations similar to the Nage concept might be either in the Malayo-Polynesian-speaking world or within a broader range of languages and societies, I am unable to say. But in a comparative frame, equally important is the contrast between the Nage (and Sumbanese, Ilongot, and Cuna) view of metaphor and European “metaphor,” at least if one is to judge from the meaning of Greek metapheiren, as a “transfer” or “carrying over” –

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

35

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 36

as in the transferring of an idea pertaining to an animal to a human subject. Clearly, metaphor as “transfer” involves the image of connecting things. By contrast, metaphor as expressed in pata péle conveys quite the opposite meaning, of something that disconnects – or forms a barrier rather than a bridge. But this does not mean that Nage do not also recognize metaphors as ways of effectively articulating thoughts and feelings, anymore than it means that anglophones, for example, do not appreciate the indirectness and opacity of metaphor – the fact that rather than describing humans directly and explicitly in strictly human terms, one speaks instead of animals, plants, or something else not human. Indeed, the European and Nage concepts both turn on division and difference: in the first case between two domains (source and target) and in the second between something that separates, covers, or conceals (the metaphorical statement) and something that is separated and covered (the implicit referent). Of course, in the Nage conception this referent is only partly “covered” since, for those who know the metaphor, the meaning is transparent. And in a parallel way, the “transfer” a metaphor effects between two domains is less than complete for, in the process, the message received is always partly transformed – even though the meaning extracted from the source necessarily retains some resemblance to the meaning assumed in the target domain. (Think, for example, of what changes and remains the same when we speak of the “flow” of a river and the “flow” of speech.) However, one should not make too much of the words in which concepts of “metaphor” are expressed, for both European “metaphor” (or Latin metaphora, from Greek metapheiren) and Nage pata péle must themselves be understood as figurative usages – if not as metaphors in the stricter sense, then as metonymies in which different parts refer to the same whole. In so doing, moreover, they focus on different modalities of the same complex phenomenon, and, to that extent, analyzing them comparatively illuminates two contrary yet ultimately complementary properties of a single thing.2 “Metaphor” and Conventional Metaphor As confirmed by their own understanding, it should be quite clear that Nage pata péle specifically denotes conventional metaphors: standard verbal expressions that describe something human, say, by talking about something nonhuman. For a considerable time, however, anthropologists have additionally

36

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 37

employed “metaphor” as an analytical category in the investigations of relations, including relations between humans and animals, which are not expressed, or are not expressed solely or primarily, in conventional metaphors. Deriving from the work of Jakobson, this other use of “metaphor” specifies one of two major forms of symbolic or semiotic relations (the other, of course, being identified with metonymy). In regard to relations that are not semantic or even linguistic, a well-known application of this contrast is Jakobson’s interpretation, later taken up by Leach (1976), of Frazer’s homeopathic and contagious magic – acts that frequently lack any verbal component – as founded on metaphor and metonymy, respectively (Jakobson and Halle 1956, 95). Understood in this way, “metaphor” became a mainstay of structuralism, and in anthropology came to be employed in the interpretation of relations discernible not only in ritual and myth but also, for example, in forms of social organization, including systems of kinship and marriage (e.g., Wagner 1986). In fact, so popular has been this extended acceptation of metaphor that it has survived into the twenty-first century, thus well past the heyday of structuralism and even poststructuralism. Especially in regard to the distinction with conventional metaphor, it is worth stressing that, while “metaphor” in the Jakobsonian sense is sometimes identifiable in what members of a cultural community commonly say (e.g., when members of a a turtle clan describe themselves as turtles), such verbal expression is neither exclusive nor necessary. That is, a relation between things thus identifiable as “metaphor” might be discerned as an aspect of those things of which culture participants are, or quite likely will be, unaware, so that their determination will be mainly or entirely the product of an extraneous interpretation. Among the best known instances of such anthropological deployment of “metaphor,” and one with special relevance for human relations with animals and other living things, is Lévi-Strauss’s (1963) interpretation of totemism as involving a relation of metaphor connecting a series of human groups comprising a single social system and a series of natural species. For Lévi-Strauss, it will be recalled, this relation defines the fundamental structure of totemic systems, and any substantial connections participants posit between themselves and their totem species – for example, an identification of the species as ancestors or as sharing common descent with humans – are secondary, contingent, and inessential. In the same way, similarities of behaviour or physical form posited between a totem animal and human members of a totemic group are not primary but derivative.

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

37

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 38

Obviously, “metaphor” as applied to conventional Nage expressions employing animals and “metaphor” as applied to totemism both entail regularly expressed conceptual connections between animals and humans. This would suggest a fundamental resemblance, but in other respects the two instances of “metaphor” are quite different. A difference already touched on lies in the fact that metaphors like “a dog pissing at the edge of a path” are recognized by Nage themselves as figurative usages, that is, as not entailing any idea that a person so described really is a dog or has temporarily become a dog – nor, indeed, that the human referent is actually urinating. By contrast, the structural relation of totemism as articulated by Lévi-Strauss is metaphoric specifically for the analyst, even though the component associations between human groups and animals are phenomena with which members will naturally be familiar. In addition, members of a “dog clan,” for example, may claim a substantial connection with canines. In what sense humans actually identify with their totemic species is a topic of considerable dispute in anthropology (compare, e.g., Lévi-Strauss’s view with that of ontological pluralists like Descola 2013). But it is fair to say that members of totemic groups would not usually regard their identification with a totem animal as “merely a way of speaking” (Nage bholo ‘ana) – nor, as this would imply, as something that could be more exactly verbalized in a quite different way. (Even though it would hardly matter for an understanding of Nage conventional metaphors, it is also worth mentioning that, with one possible exception, what can be called “totems” among Nage comprise not animals but plants [Forth 2009a; Forth 2016, 260].) Focusing on the Nage corpus, conventional metaphors and “metaphor” as employed in structuralist analysis can be seen to differ in at least four other respects. First, Nage recognition of the figurative character of conventional metaphors is consistent with their alternative expression, in many cases, either as similes (“like a dog …”) or as metaphors in the stricter sense. Second, whereas in totemism an animal, or sometimes two or more animals, is exclusively related to a single group or category of people, with conventional animal metaphors all animals are, with relatively few exceptions (such as when an expression can only be applied either to women or men), prospectively identified with anyone. Thus, in principle, any Nage can be described, for example, as “a urinating dog,” “a chicken with feathered legs,” or a “dolphin down by the coast.” Third, and following from the foregoing, the connection between humans and animals in totemism is permanent, so

38

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 39

that a member of a dog clan, say, is always a dog. By contrast, someone whose work is inconstant, and who is therefore characterized as “a dog pissing at the edge of a path,” may only very occasionally behave in this way and, furthermore, only in the estimation of one or more specific others – based, perhaps, on how the person’s behaviour affects them. To take another example, “bees inside a cavity” (No. 512) describes several people speaking simultaneously or in such a way that individual voices cannot be distinguished and whose conversation is likely to bother other people. But the individuals thus characterized do not of course always converse in this way. In other words, Nage metaphors refer largely to individuals or collections of individuals rather than to whole categories of people, and they are more often used situationally rather than categorically as references to constant human characters. (These specifications, I suspect, probably apply to animal metaphors in most languages.) A fourth distinction is also related to the first two. As will become clear from chapter 8, many animal metaphors in the Nage corpus are synonymous with others or nearly so. That is, the same or very similar human attributes are described with metaphors employing quite different animals. With totemism, by contrast, the association of a social group or category is, again, fixed by tradition, and while it is possible for groups to possess more than one totem simultaneously, there can be no substitution of one animal for another. Here, one may be reminded of Sperber’s (1975) point that, by contrast to components of natural language (words, phrases), symbols cannot be “translated” by other symbols. However, in this respect synonymous conventional metaphors, as standard expressions with well-defined meanings, tend to resemble non-figurative linguistic usages and, to that extent, differ from other forms of symbolism. In exploring relations between humans and other living things, and using the concept in an extended and at least partly Jakobsonian sense, anthropologists have of course applied metaphor to far more than totemism. A noteworthy example from eastern Indonesia is Fox’s (1971) article “Sister’s Child as Plant,” in which a pervasive analogy with plant growth and cultivation is shown to govern Rotinese conceptions of kinship. But many other instances concern not plants but animals, as, for example, Tambiah’s (1969) nearly contemporaneous 1969 article in which he distinguishes “metaphorical” and “metonymical” forms of human-animal relations among the non-totemic Thai. And another instance is Valeri’s (2000) more recent discussion of taboo

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

39

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 40

among the eastern Indonesian Huaulu, in which he distinguishes human relations with dogs and chickens, respectively, in the same way. Although employing “metaphor” almost entirely as a reference to figurative language, worthy of special attention in connection with the expressive deployment of animal categories is Evans-Pritchard’s work on the Nuer, not least because it represents a landmark development in the anthropological study of relations between humans and animals that is both earlier and quite distinct from Lévi-Straussian structuralist approaches. A well-known example is Evans-Pritchard’s (1956, 88) interpretation of the Nuer statement “twins are birds,” which he identifies as a “belief ” (80) although later as a “symbol” – and, ultimately, a symbol of the special relation of twins to god (131–2). This double characterization may seem inconsistent insofar as “beliefs” and “symbols” are usually contrasted as propositions held to be literally true and not literally true. Similarly ambiguous is Evans-Pritchard’s use of “metaphor,” for example when he asserts that the Nuer statement that twins and birds are kin “may be regarded as metaphorical” but not the relationship between twins and birds per se. Or when he speaks of an “implicit metaphor which runs throughout Nuer religion of light and dark, associated with sky and earth” (97, emphasis added) while otherwise reserving “metaphor” for figurative language, which is to say, conventional metaphor. Nevertheless, in its symbolic aspect, EvansPritchard further analyzes the Nuer equation of twins and birds as one based in an analogy, whereby twins are considered related to god in a way similar to birds – thus much in the same way as Crocker (1977a) interpreted the “metaphor” he (Crocker) detected in the Bororo identification of men and parrots. And also recalling the Bororo relation, the Nuer identification of twins and birds is not only verbalized but finds further expression in ritual, for example when a dead infant twin is not buried like other infants but instead is placed in the fork of a tree (Evans Pritchard 1956, 129–30). Insofar as Nuer ideas about twins and birds might therefore be construed as entailing metaphor (or, alternatively, “metonymy” [see Turner 1991]), then so might the relation between Nuer and cattle or, more specifically, Nuer men and oxen (Evans-Pritchard 1940; Evans-Pritchard 1956). In this case too, “metaphor” – a word that appears nowhere in Evans-Pritchard’s 1940 monograph – is not a usage of the ethnographer himself. However, subsequent commentators have interpreted the relation as metaphoric (e.g., Crocker 1977b, 61–2; Hutchinson 1996, 54; Willis 1974, 14–15).3 And, in regard to EvansPritchard’s characterization of the Nuer “social idiom” as a “bovine idiom,”

40

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 41

one must ask what this could mean other than a use of cattle as a metaphor or, more exactly, a pervasive conceptual metaphor. Nevertheless, an explicit use of “metaphor” in a non-linguistic or non-semantic sense by late twentieth-century anthropologists interpreting conceptual relations between humans and animals is more directly traceable to European structuralism, including, of course, Jakobson’s concept of metaphor. Besides Tambiah’s analysis of animals in Thai life and Crocker’s reanalysis of the Bororo identification of men and macaws, noteworthy instances include Geertz’s (1973) interpretation of Balinese fighting-cocks as metaphors of Balinese men and manhood, and Ohnuki-Tierney’s (1987) detailed investigation of the significance of the monkey in Japanese society. In addition, a particular interpretation of metaphor (or “lived metaphors”) has been central to phenomenological approaches in anthropology (Jackson 1996), while more recently Hurn (2012) has employed “metaphor” in a comparative discussion of human-animal relations in various cultural settings, including her own investigations of attitudes towards foxes and (human) “incomers” in rural Wales. Despite their various applications of a largely structuralist notion of metaphor, however, none of the foregoing authors has given much attention to conventional animal metaphors. In fact, few anthropologists have referred to “conventional metaphor” at all, though Roger Keesing (1985) has used the term to denote something more like conceptual metaphor (specifically as an alternative interpretation of what other anthropologists have understood as “beliefs” in existent entities), and Michelle Rosaldo (1980, 194) speaks of “rice” and “honey” as “conventional ways of talking about a wife” among the Ilongot. Although similarly not specifying them as such, in the present context a somewhat more important exception is Geertz’s brief discussion of conventional Balinese metaphors incorporating the cock as a vehicle and referring, for example, to a hero, dandy, lady killer, and to “a pompous man whose behavior presumes above his station” (described as a “tailless cock”). But these several verbal usages appear quite incidental to what the author calls the “deep psychological identification of Balinese men with their [fighting] cocks” (Geertz 1973, 417), which he demonstrates mostly with reference to a variety of practices, behaviours, and attitudes. Also, immediately after mentioning conventional cock metaphors, Geertz tellingly suggests, apparently underscoring his use of metaphor in a broader, analytical sense, that this identification (or, more specifically, the “intimacy of men with their cocks”) is “more than metaphorical” (415).

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

41

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 42

To the extent that Nuer identification of men and cattle might similarly be construed as metaphoric, it should be noted how, in this case too, Nuer employ conventional cattle metaphors – for example, designating leading men as “bulls,” described by Evans-Pritchard (1956, 254) as “a common metaphor of speech” – as well as metaphors involving other animals (notably ants [Evans-Pritchard 1956, 12]). On the other hand, rather than speaking of people as cattle, more often, it seems, Nuer describe cattle as people (as when a cow is called a man’s “mother”), and, as with the Balinese and their fighting-cocks, the pervasive relationship that obtains between men and cattle obviously entails far more than employing the animals as vehicles of figurative language. How Bororo men and macaws might figure in these comparisons is unclear since, quite remarkably after all the attention that has been given to this relationship, Crocker (1977a, 189) states that he never heard a Bororo spontaneously assert the proposition “we are red macaws.” Nevertheless, the proposition evidently amounts to more than a single conventional metaphor for, as mentioned earlier, it too finds expression in a variety of nonverbal media. The Question of Non-figurative “Metaphor” in Nage Human-Animal Relations Unlike totemism, where people expressly identify themselves with a particular animal (and possibly also unlike the Bororo in regard to macaws), only rarely do Nage employ conventional animal metaphors self-referentially, in the first person singular or plural. More often, Nage metaphors are expressed in the third person – “he is a dolphin”; “she is like a buffalo thinking of its offspring” – and even more frequently in the second person, in direct address to an individual or collection of individuals. Connected with this, most Nage animal metaphors convey a negative evaluation, being used to criticize a particular behaviour, to make fun of someone (including someone’s appearance), or to express annoyance or exasperation at the way people are conducting themselves. A number of Nage animal metaphors, however, diverge from these generalizations, partly because all can be used in the first person (“I am/we are X”) and partly because none is normally expressed as a simile. At least one of the exceptional usages, moreover, bears especially close comparison with the Bororo declaration (if such it is) that their men are red macaws, at least

42

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 43

as Crocker construes this. The Nage expression is “we are god’s chickens” (kita ana manu déwa, No. 266), a statement heard in songs of mourning (pata kasi) where it is supplemented by lyrics elaborating on this relationship, and which applies to all Nage and possibly to human beings in general. Crocker, it may be recalled, explains Bororo men’s identification with macaws as resting on an analogy involving a comparison between the position of men in relation to women in this matrilineal society and the situation of pet macaws, creatures owned almost entirely by women and housed in that part of Bororo settlements where women exercise a certain dominance. Particularly in his grounding of the representation in social experience, it should be pointed out that Crocker does not view the Bororo man-macaw connection as entailing “metaphor” in the sense Lévi-Strauss applied the concept to totemism – as a function of an entire system conjoining a series of natural kinds with a series of human categories or groups. Nor, as he demonstrates, does the identification derive from mystical ideas connecting humans, macaws, and spiritual entities, or other relations interpretable as metonymic or synecdochal (although certain Bororo attitudes and usages, he argues, do indeed reflect synecdoche or metonymy [Crocker 1977a, 168]). Crocker (1977b, 61) does, however, conclude that the Bororo idea that “men are red macaws” is a metaphor, specifically, a “complex internal metaphor” based in a substantial similarity of two analogous relationships involving not just men and birds but men, birds, and women, and expressive of “the irony of their masculine condition.” Although the Nage metaphor identifying humans as god’s chickens equally rests on analogy, an important difference from the Bororo identification of men and macaws lies in the fact that the interpretation is one proffered by Nage themselves. For, as they explained, “we are god’s chickens” means simply that, in relation to god, human beings are as small and dependant in matters of life and death as are domestic fowls in relation to their human owners, who call them together and – since chickens are regularly killed and eaten – determine the time and circumstances of their deaths. The Nage metaphor is therefore substantially identical to the previously mentioned Nuer ant metaphor, which describes humans as being “very tiny in respect to God” (Evans-Pritchard 1956, 12). In effect, then, Nage understand their metaphor as deriving from an “external analogy” (humans: god:: chickens: owners) involving two pairs of terms and, in this way, contrasting to the “internal analogy” (men: women:: macaws: women) and the “internal metaphor” that

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

43

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 44

Crocker sees as constitutive of Bororo men’s identification with macaws. As accords with their own interpretation, Nage denied that “we are god’s chickens” implies any mystical affinity (e.g., a common descent or spiritual identity) between chickens and humans, even though, by their own analysis, the expression turns on a relationship between humans and a spiritual third party – namely, “god.” By contrast, the Bororo representation is ultimately binary, involving only birds and humans, even though the second term admits a further distinction between men and women, and the analogy this latter distinction facilitates is furthermore implicit and contingent on a particular anthropological interpretation. Another difference concerns the quasihuman status Bororo accord red macaws, which are taboo and never eaten; by contrast, chickens are the domestic animal Nage kill and consume most often. And whereas the Bororo identification with macaws is manifest largely in ritual action, the Nage identification with domestic fowls finds expression only verbally, as one of a long list of metaphors (see chapter 4) where, with reference to specific actions, circumstances, or appearances, Nage compare people to chickens in a large variety of ways.4 Evidently, then, Nage identify less exclusively with chickens than Bororo apparently do with macaws. Nevertheless, despite this difference and others, Nage identifying humans with domestic fowls and Bororo men linking themselves with pet parrots are evidently based on conceptual relations of the same formal sort. In addition, both can be called contextual insofar as it is specifically in the context of relationships with women that Bororo men identify as macaws, just as it is only in relation to god – and then mostly in the context of death – that Nage speak of themselves collectively as chickens. In this connection one can readily endorse Crocker’s (1997b, 61) observation that “metaphor postulates the ‘identity’ of two different entities only in highly specific senses.” At the same time, this selectivity, as it can also be characterized, surely applies to symbolism in general – as opposed to empirical and folk taxonomic knowledge of animals, which, as noted in the previous chapter, operates with gestalts. Indeed, this last contrast underscores the difference between symbolic linkage of any sort and connections revealed in ethnotaxonomic classifications, where animals and plants are categorized not on the basis of analogy or selective resemblance but primarily with reference to comprehensive empirical observation of perceptual similarity and dissimilarity. Another Nage metaphor sometimes employed self-referentially and applied to a large section of Nage society – in fact, all Nage adult men, a speci-

44

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 45

fication revealing another commonality with the more famous Bororo usage – is “Nage dog(s)” (lako Nage, No. 107). As both observed usage and local commentary make clear, the phrase does not refer specifically to dogs as animals kept by Nage people, even though in this society it is indeed men rather than women who normally own dogs. Instead, it compares Nage men, and more specifically men of central Nage, to male dogs in regard to sexual appetite and their special reputation for engaging in multiple extramarital and premarital relationships. In fact, both in its interpretation and recognized motivation the usage compares closely with the American English metaphor “horn dog” and the apparently older African American proverb “a man’s got too much dog in him” (Liebow 1967, 121–2; see also the 1976 recording of this title by singer Shelbra Deane), and it is similarly comparable to the Yoruba use of “dog” (ajá) as a metaphorical reference to human “sexual incontinence/promiscuity” (Olatéju 2005, 372–3). Like Bororo and American counterparts, the Nage expression turns on analogy (men: women:: male dogs: bitches); it implies that Nage men are in a particular respect – heterosexual relations – like dogs or how Nage represent dogs to be; and, like the expression identifying humans as god’s chickens, it does not entail any mystical connection between people and dogs. In regard to the specificity of features involved in this usage, it should also be remarked that dogs figure in numerous other Nage conventional metaphors and that these focus on quite different attributes of dogs. Thus, while Nage men often identify closely with their dogs (Forth 2016, 86–90), by way of conventional metaphors all Nage compare themselves to dogs with reference to many diverse features of humans and canines, and although dog metaphors are more numerous than are metaphors employing most other animals, as metaphorical vehicles Nage do not treat dogs any differently from these. If neither the Nage description of themselves as “chickens of god” nor the reference to their men as “Nage dogs” implicates any mystical or substantial identification of humans beings with fowls or canines, then something quite different obtains with another animal, the water buffalo (Bubalis bubalis). As explained elsewhere (Forth 1998; Forth 2018a), Nage consider themselves, and especially their high-ranking men, as existing simultaneously as human beings and as buffalo, specifically buffalo kept, raised, and periodically slaughtered by mountain spirits (nitu, also nitu bapu or bapu). Accordingly, when these spirits prepare to sacrifice a spirit buffalo, a human somewhere suffers illness and, in the absence of ritual countermeasures, will subsequently die. In

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

45

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 46

this way, Nage identify themselves not with ordinary, earthly buffalo but with buffalo existing in spirit form and within an unseen realm of spirits, so the representation differs, for example, from the identity Bororo men recognize between themselves and ordinary, empirical birds. It should also be noted that Nage do not identify these spirit buffalo with their “souls” (mae), spiritual components of living persons that are susceptible to other kinds of malevolent spirits (most notably, human witches). Nevertheless, since the mountain spirits are conceived to own and use water buffalo in exactly the same way as do people, and because, within their own realm, these spirit buffalo take the same form as earthly buffalo, Nage are connected with buffalo in a categorical sense. And the same applies to the buffalo-owing spirits, by virtue of the inverse idea that, whenever Nage slaughter an earthly buffalo, a spirit meets its end. For Nage, therefore, buffalo form part of a trichotomous relationship further linking spirits and humans, a relationship I have previously called “reciprocal inversion” (Forth 1998). Viewed as a set of analogical relations – wherein spirits are to spirit buffalo and spirit buffalo are to humans as humans are to earthly buffalo and earthly buffalo to spirits – in these ideas one also discovers the basis of a further identification of humans and anthropomorphous spirits that finds expression in Nage claims that spirits (nitu) regard human beings as spirits (nitu) and themselves as humans (342–3). Identifying humans in different ways with both spirits and spirit buffalo, it should be mentioned how this complex of ideas differs from Viveiros de Castro’s (1998) “perspectivist” version of animism, wherein animals are said to assume human form in some hidden dimension while humans similarly have a partial existence as empirical game animals. For in the Nage idea, the fundamental relationship is not between humans and animals but between humans and spirits, even though an animal figures as the medium by which spirits and humans have, as it were, aggressive access to one another. Indeed, the Nage representation is more suggestive of what another neo-animist writer (Descola 2013) dubs “analogism.” Insofar as Nage conceive of spirits raising and killing buffalo much in the same way as humans, there is in this idea an obvious parallel with the “chickens of god” metaphor, where god is represented as determining the fate of humans in a way similar to buffalo-owning spirits. Indeed, one might be inclined to treat the two ideas as expressions of a single representation employing different sacrificial animals, in part because Nage employ “chicken” as a

46

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 47

metaphorical understatement designating a more valuable animal, including a buffalo (see No. 298). But beyond this formal similarity is a fundamental ontological difference. Besides the fact that Nage normally speak of “god” (déwa, ga’e déwa) and buffalo-owning spirits (nitu) as quite different sorts of beings, the idea that human beings are buffalo owned by spirits is definitely not a figurative usage, like describing humans as god’s chickens or Nage men as dogs. Indeed, unlike these usages, “we are buffalo,” although expressing an idea Nage would certainly recognize, is not an assertion they themselves ordinarily make but is instead a proposition entailed in Nage spiritual cosmology, a pattern of ideas expressed both in myth (Forth 1998, 25–30) and in ritual action and interpretations thereof offered by ritual specialists. As Nage affirmed, the proposition that humans are spirit buffalo is not an instance of pata péle, a “statement that separates or covers” – which is to say a metaphor – but something that is taken as “true” (tebhe) and that Nage themselves usually do not analyze or question. Consistent with this recognized difference, the relationship between humans and (spirit) buffalo is quite different from relations of similarity between buffalo and humans expressed in Nage conventional metaphors. For one thing, being simultaneously spirit buffalo is an existential property of human beings. It is both permanent and consequential, specifically in the sense that what spirits do to their buffalo is thought to have real effects in the form of human illness or death. By contrast, nothing remotely similar applies to the twenty conventional buffalo metaphors Nage apply to humans or, for that matter, to any of their other conventional animal metaphors. That is, calling someone a “buffalo that wrecks its enclosure” (No. 13), for example, is simply declarative and practical, describing certain human actions. And while the statement, if applied to someone in direct address, could result in anger, resentment, or hurt feelings, Nage would not see it as having any physical effect comparable to what is supposed to occur when a spirit sacrifices a spirit buffalo. From these differences, which amount to what can be called a cognitive separation between two unconnected conceptions of the human-buffalo relationship, it comes as no surprise that Nage possess no conventional metaphors describing people as “buffalo” with reference to their susceptibility to attack by spirits. In this respect, then, the Nage representation seems to differ, for example, from the Balinese identification of men with fighting-cocks,

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

47

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 48

which appears completely continuous with conventional metaphors employing the cock. Rather than supernatural connections with either humans or spirits, moreover, Nage conventional buffalo metaphors reflect a thoroughly naturalistic representation of the animal Bubalis bubalis informed by regularly observed attributes of empirical buffalo or, far less often, by uses to which the animals are put (e.g., as bridewealth) and, in only in a single case (No. 2), does a metaphor reflect a belief concerning a special supra-empirical power ascribed to some earthly buffalo. In addition, Nage deploy these attributes, individually and selectively, in talking about actions or attitudes of individual humans – including, for example, behaviour suggesting a person taking after a parent (No. 11), acting like “a dog in the manger” (No. 12), “fouling one’s own nest” (No. 13), excessive attachment to children (No. 14), and behaving in a curmudgeonly manner (No. 16). From these examples, it will also be noticed how some replicate English conventional metaphors, although ones whose vehicles are of course quite different animals. In contrast, the mystical conception of humans as spirit buffalo pertains neither to ordinary dealings with buffalo nor regular social interaction with other human beings but solely to buffalo sacrifice, including occasions when people experience physical or mental distress and suspect they might be victims of spirit sacrifice – and therefore consider sacrificing one of their own buffalo as a remedy. By the same token, in mundane contexts – when herding buffalo, watering or taking the animals to graze, installing them in enclosures, or, nowadays, employing buffalo in puddling wet rice fields – Nage do not speak of, nor by all indications do they think about, the animals as embodiments of dangerous spirits. And it is, of course, precisely these mundane interactions with water buffalo that inform Nage conventional metaphors that employ the buffalo as their vehicle. All of the foregoing applies equally to another spiritual belief, although one that, it should be stressed, is not in any way articulated with the representation of humans as spirit buffalo. This is the idea that, in the domain of forest spirits (also designated as nitu), Giant rats (Papagomys armandvillei) exist as buffalo belonging to the spirits (bhada nitu) – one of a series of propositions representing wild mammals as the spirits’ domestic animals (Forth 2016, 135–40). These propositions too are not figurative usages, nor do they inform any conventional metaphors, employing Giant rats or any other wild animal.

48

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 49

Concluding Remarks Even if some anthropologists might be inclined to apply a concept of metaphor to the Nage representation of humans as spirit buffalo – something I have not found particularly useful to do either here or in previous writings – it is clear that what can broadly be called their symbolic use of this animal admits at least two quite separate forms that suggest different kinds of cognitive processing. In one, evident in conventional animal metaphors, specific empirical features of an animal, physical or behavioural, are redeployed to construct a variety of figurative expressions used to talk about individual humans or other things that are not animals. In the other, a general identification of humans with spirit buffalo most likely has its basis in the imaginative conjecture that, just as humans raise and sacrifice domestic animals, so by analogy there might be something that raises and sacrifices humans. And this compelling and indeed counterintuitive idea has evidently “caught on” and been maintained as an article of Nage cosmology, something people accept as true or possibly true. As demonstrated, however, exactly the same analogy is replicated in the expressly figurative proposition whereby Nage declare themselves to be god’s chickens. Hence one product of this discussion is the hardly surprising conclusion that formally identical propositions apparently identifying human beings as non-human animals can be understood by users in ontologically or epistemologically very different ways. Whatever other merits it might have, applying “metaphor” to both would therefore be unfortunate – certainly it would make little sense to Nage – and a case can easily be made for restricting “metaphor” to figurative usages, in other words to conventional metaphor, as does Sandor (1986, 103) when he forthrightly asserts that “no metaphor occurs where none is recognized.” Non-figurative propositions might then simply be designated as “beliefs.” There is, of course, nothing new about this. As shown, a contrast of “metaphor” and “belief ” runs throughout Evans-Pritchard’s interpretation of Nuer religion. Rather more recently, in a study of African sorcery, West (2007) rejects any application of “metaphor” to statements informants insist are literally true, cleverly (and perhaps metaphorically) characterizing such interpretations as a form of sorcery employed by ethnographers. A contrast of metaphor and belief is also employed by Sperber (1975) in his cognitive theory of symbolism, specifically where he distinguishes varieties

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

49

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 50

of symbolic cognition as “belief ” and “figure” (by which he transparently refers to conventional metaphor). Of course, symbolism is an aspect not only of thought and language but also of actions, and one merit of Sperber’s theory is his linking of “figure” and “belief,” respectively, with “mime” and “sacrifice.” Why instead of “sacrifice” he does not employ the more general category “ritual” (which would include magic and taboo) is unclear, but whatever the reason, the point is that, by contrast to mime, sacrifice (or ritual) is typically understood by participants as possessing efficacy – as making rather than simply marking a change – and as thereby corresponding to “belief ” as something pertaining to entities accepted as efficacious and consequential. It hardly needs remarking that “belief ” is a highly problematic category of cross-cultural comparison, not least because of its association with the doctrinal faith crucial to Christianity (Needham 1972). However, no suitable substitute is plainly available. Even apart from its established use in linguistics as a reference to themes informing conventional metaphors, “conceptual metaphor” will not do, especially because conceptual metaphors are themselves metaphoric and are likely to be recognized as such by users of derivative conventional metaphors. (Think, for example, of “people are animals,” which, before Linnaeus and Darwin, English-speakers employing conventional animal metaphors could not have accepted as anything other than a figurative proposition.) As the contrary of “metaphor,” “belief” is an acceptable reference to ideas not subject to empirical test – such as human beings having a parallel existence as spirit buffalo – so long as the term is understood as referring to propositions that a community accepts uncritically, without analyzing them in relation to other items of knowledge that could discredit them. Thus defined, it is of course this unanalyzed quality of “beliefs” that distinguishes them from (conventional) metaphors. As demonstrated by Nage recognition of their animal metaphors as pata péle (“separating or covering speech”), which is to say figurative expressions that cannot be taken literally, metaphors are indeed statements that have effectively been analyzed and have been found, as it were, acceptably deviant (cf. Sandor 1986, 105–6) in relation to other uses of the same words. Sperber (1975) employs the unanalyzed quality of certain propositions as the primary criterion in distinguishing symbolic knowledge (or “symbolism in general,” the translation of the original French title of his book) from empirical or “encyclopaedic” knowledge. However, insofar as conventional metaphors are a form of symbolism, they must be a

50

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 51

special kind, and contrary to Sperber, who simply treats “metaphor” (or “figure”) and “belief ” as two manifestations of a single form of cognition, they must reflect a special form of symbolic thinking – one that is consciously or expressly symbolic. Expressed another way, with metaphors disbelief is deliberately suspended and knowingly so (Sandor 1986, 117; see also Levin 1993, 121) since this suspension is necessary to preserve the connection between source (vehicle) and target (interpretation or referent) and, hence, the social, intellectual, or emotional value of the metaphor. As will become clear in chapter 8, distinguishing metaphor and belief as cognitively different kinds of representation is essential to understanding why beliefs linking animals with spirits play virtually no part in motivating Nage animal metaphors, and why, instead, such metaphors typically draw directly on empirical features of animals or (in a far smaller number of cases) utilitarian practices involving animals. However analyzed, some distinction between metaphor and belief should find favour among proponents of ontological pluralism, the position discussed at the beginning of this chapter, especially since pluralists evidently reject any application of metaphor to anything they interpret a society’s members accepting as real or as involving an actual connection (or an absence of a distinction) between things. This of course would particularly apply to nonWestern societies, conceived as possessing ontologies radically different from the ontological “naturalism” attributed exclusively to Western thought. Yet it remains unclear how ontological pluralists could subscribe to a comparative deployment of any conception of metaphor. For accepting consciously figurative forms of language as anything other than an artefact of a peculiarly Western ontology, and more particularly as a regular way of expressing ideas in societies deemed to be “animist” (or at least not “naturalist’), would appear to undermine, or at least seriously qualify, a representation of animism – a perspective that recognizes no essential difference between humans and nonhumans – as a dominant, pervasive, or virtually exclusive way of thinking about and experiencing the world. By the same token, pluralists might want to argue that a statement like “we are god’s chickens” reveals a Nage conception of a real identity between humans and chickens. As shown, this view finds no support in what Nage themselves say about this or their other animal metaphors, nor indeed in their representation of conventional metaphors as pata péle (“covering speech”) – an indigenous understanding consistent with the bulk of ethnographic evidence revealing that Nage cannot be

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

51

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 52

called “animists” or exclusive adherents to any “ontology” radically different from “naturalism (Forth 2016; Forth 2018b). At the same time – and hardly surprisingly in view of their implicitly wholesale rejection of metaphor, both as an indigenous and as an analytical category – ontological pluralists, even those who, like Descola and Viveiros de Castro (e.g., Viveiros de Castro 2004), focus on human-animal relations, have not explicitly attended to conventional animal metaphors, or to what can most reasonably and parsimoniously be construed as such. So it remains uncertain how they would regard these or any other kind of apparently figurative discourse among members of smallscale non-Western societies – if indeed they recognize them at all. In addition, some proponents of the “ontological turn” apparently entertain parallel reservations about the concept of belief (Holbraad and Petersen 2017, 192–4). These circumstances, then, point to the special importance of a comprehensive study of animal metaphors in a society like that of the Nage, the possible ontological significance of which I further address in chapter 9. In the next several chapters, however, I focus on individual metaphors and how Nage employ and understand them in the course of their daily lives.

52

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 53

3 Domestic Mammal Metaphors – and Some Wild Variants

Referring to all animals, ana wa has its prototype in mammals and especially large domestic animals. More than any other kind of animal, mammals are vehicles for the greatest number of Nage animal metaphors, comprising over 42 percent (240 of 566) of the total. The next highest is birds, at 31 percent (178). As demonstrated elsewhere, “mammal” operates as a psychologically salient category – a life form taxon – in Nage folk taxonomy. Although the category is not labelled by a single word, Nage will use lako wawi, “dog [and] pig,” a standard composite, to refer to mammals as a group distinct from other animals – for example, when talking about mating practices or methods of reproduction. In discussing individual metaphors, I divide mammals into domestic and wild kinds (treated in chapter 4), reviewing these in the same order followed in Forth (2016). Thus the present chapter begins with water buffalo metaphors and ends with metaphors incorporating cats, while chapter 4 starts with deer metaphors and ends with expressions incorporating the monkey. Although cats and pigs both comprise “domestic” and “wild” kinds, distinguished with the qualifiers bo’a (“village”) and witu (“forest”; see e.g., wawi bo’a, “village pigs,” and wawi witu, “forest pigs”), largely to facilitate comparison with Nage mammal knowledge described in Forth (2016) I deal with all pig and all cat metaphors in the present chapter. How far this distinction is significant for metaphorical uses of the two animals is then discussed in individual commentaries. Nage folk taxonomy includes eighteen named folk-generic categories of mammals (Forth 2016, 253, table 11.1). All of these are employed metaphorically with the exception of ana menge or dhéke menge (denoting mice and

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 54

small rats) and dhéke ngewo (a large forest rat). What is more, the first, especially, is implicitly encompassed by several metaphors employing dhéke (see Nos. 180–96), interpreted as a more inclusive “intermediate” taxon (sensu Berlin 1992) subsuming five generic categories of rats and mice, though also referring contextually to large commensal rats (specifiable as dhéke méze, “big rat”). The only mammal “folk-specifics” used metaphorically are ngo ngoe, denoting what Nage conceive to be a specific kind of wild cat (meo; Forth 2016, 99–101; Forth 2017b), and wawi witu, specifying wild pigs.

WATER BUFFALO • Bubalus bubalis • BHADA Larger than both horses and recently introduced cattle, water buffalo are the largest animals known to Nage. They are also the most valuable, being the most expensive component of bridewealth and the premier animal sacrifice. In both respects, it is interesting that the name bhada is related to words in other Indonesian languages meaning “wealth,” thus paralleling English “cattle” in relation to “chattel.” Until recently Nage were familiar with buffalo not only as domestic livestock but also as feral animals and objects of the hunt. With just one or two exceptions (Nos. 4, 13), however, Nage buffalo metaphors have their source in the domestic animal. 1. Ancient horns Tadu waja Someone who has lived long and thus possesses much life experience As the horns in question are those of buffalo, the usage is comparable to “buffalo measuring their horns” (No. 17). As Nage confirmed, the expression links people metaphorically with old, mature buffalo whose horns have grown long, and so it is quite different from the Nage belief according to which people who attain an extraordinary age will actually grow a small tail (Forth 2018a). 2. Buffalo able to transform Bhadha bali be’o A duplicitous person, a trickster; a clever person able to adapt readily to circumstances

54

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 55

The term describes a male buffalo reserved for sacrifice that is reputedly able to temporarily assume the form of a human being, sometimes its male owner (Forth 1998, 54, 166–8). Such buffalo are also claimed to be capable, while still tethered, of somehow travelling to distant places and doing damage to other people’s crops. In contrast to metaphors grounded in the behaviour of ordinary buffalo, the phrase thus reflects a belief in the supernatural powers of some sacrificial buffalo, and although it applies only to a small number of individual animals, it is apparently related to the close identification of sacrificial victims and human owners found in many societies. Some Nage attribute the powers of transforming buffalo specifically to a special spiritual quality called mae mango, although this entity is also spoken of as a collective power pertaining to buffalo in general. If there is any connection between the notion of “transforming buffalo” and the idea that humans exist simultaneously as buffalo belonging to spirits (chapter 2), it was not articulated in Nage statements about this metaphor. Where “transforming buffalo” is used in the sense of a duplicitous person, it is usually uttered as a warning to others to beware of someone. In the other sense, it can function as a proverb advising people to emulate such fantastic animals (“we should be like transforming buffalo,” kita ngusa bhia bali be’o). 3. Buffalo bull sniffing a female buffalo’s urine Bhada ingo cio A person with an excessively serious or pained facial expression Apart from informant specifications, the fact that the urine belongs to a cow buffalo is indicated by cio, which, in contrast to suka (“male urination, urination in general”), specifies a woman urinating. As Nage say stallions and males of imported cattle habitually sniff at the urine of mares and cows in the same way, the specification of buffalo appears somewhat arbitrary. 4. Buffalo carrying vines on top of its head Bhada su’u koba A person who carries a heavy load but fails to tie it up or otherwise secure it properly In this circumstance the load is likely to come apart and its contents are likely to fall. In a broader sense, the metaphor can describe someone who works

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

55

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 56

Figure 1 Buffalo with a nose-ring (No. 7)

hard but in a disorderly and thus ineffective or ineffectual way. Usually expressed as a simile, the first application therefore entails a simple physical comparison whereas the second conveys a more abstract, moral allusion. The phrase describes a feral buffalo that is rummaging in the forest and whose head and horns become entangled in jungle vines. Typically in this situation, the vines do not become so firmly attached that they will not soon come loose and fall off. 5. Buffalo defecating as it moves Bhada ta’i la’a A messy, untidy person, especially in the performance of some task One use of the metaphor I recorded was “you work like a buffalo shitting as it walks” (kau kema bia bhada ta’i la’a). As noted for the metaphorical use of

56

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 57

“buffalo dung” (No. 6), the animal’s excrement characteristically forms a solid clump, but when a buffalo defecates as it moves, the faeces obviously become scattered, fouling a wider area. 6. Buffalo dung Ta’i bhada Someone who never changes or is immoveable and difficult to shift Usually expressed as “to live like buffalo dung,” the metaphor can convey a negative evaluation. Nevertheless, Some Nage interpret it as referring to a group of people that is united, or at least residentially not scattered or dispersed. Buffalo faeces characteristically form a solid, immobile heap, unlike the droppings of some other animals, and in the same regard a contrasting metaphor is “goat droppings” (No. 70). In English idioms, shit of any sort usually if not invariably conveys negative associations. For Nage, by contrast, dung in certain respects can represent a positive value. Another expression exploiting the same image is “a whetstone stuck in a clump of buffalo dung” (watu dhédhe ena ta’i bhada), referring to someone who visits a place and will not leave. 7. Buffalo fitted with a nose-ring Bhada tusu héle People who simply follows others, who will do anything they are told and obey instructions automatically and without thought An alternative is “buffalo tied by a nose-ring” (bhada ike héle). Although obedience and following orders are naturally valued by Nage, this phrase expresses a negative judgment. Perhaps most significantly in this context, Nage fit buffalo with nose-rings – traditionally made of a kind of liana – when leading them to slaughter. (Figure 1 shows a buffalo with a modern nose-ring.) The Nage metaphor is obviously comparable to English “lead (someone) by the nose.” 8. Buffalo goes first, horse follows Bhada ulu, ja dhéko A prominent, authoritative person who is followed by someone less influential or of lower standing

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

57

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 58

The metaphor is usually applied to men and alludes to the requirement that, with every buffalo given as bridewealth, a horse must be provided as well. Thus Nage commonly express bridewealth amounts simply by referring to a number of buffalo, its being understood that the same number of horses should also be given. The precedence of buffalo in this context is further shown in the standard composite phrase bhada ja, “buffalo [and] horses,” where “buffalo” always comes before “horses.” A more elaborate expression is bhada ja wea, “buffalo, horses, [and] gold,” the three principal components of bridewealth, incorporating both livestock and metal goods. 9. Buffalo in the shade Bhada au bao A person who is constantly chewing on food or betel and areca nut As Nage remarked, buffalo will regularly make chewing motions while standing in a shady spot even though they are not actually eating or grazing – an apparent reference to chewing the cud. Recorded just once, the phrase can be applied critically to someone who is largely inactive and, perhaps annoyingly, appears to do little more than eat or chew. (The nut of the areca palm and the leaf or fruit of the betel vine are traditionally chewed, together with lime, as a mild intoxicant.) 10. Buffalo mounting a dog Bhada saka lako A high-ranking man who marries or cohabits with a woman of lower rank Saka, “to mount, ride,” denotes riding a horse (saka ja) but also refers to sexual mounting. Apart from using animals to talk about humans, the expression is also metaphorical or, more specifically, metonymic insofar as it employs the sexual act to allude to a wider conjugal relationship. With regard to traditional Nage society, the phrase would often refer to a master, or “nobleman” (mosa laki, No. 20), who cohabits with a female slave or concubine (fai sada taga, “wife for resting the legs”). In this last phrase, “wife” is itself metaphorical insofar as marriage was not formally possible between people of unequal rank, and a lower-ranking wife was not recognized as a “true, proper, legitimate wife” (fai laki) in a union legitimated by an exchange of bridewealth and counter-gift. The person of higher rank is thus identified

58

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 59

by the larger and more valuable animal (the buffalo) and the lower-ranking partner by the smaller and less valuable (the dog). Buffalo and dogs figure as major and minor components of bridewealth and other goods given by wife-taking to wife-giving affines. The distinction of rank between dog and buffalo applies in the same way in the opposite situation, expressed as “a dog mounting a buffalo” (No. 91), where a lower-ranking man enters a relationship with a higher-ranking woman. In both instances it is the male who “mounts” the female. 11. Buffalo over in Kawa follows its forebear(s), moved to a new enclosure it sticks to the old ways Bhada lépa Kawa dhuzu dhi ngata, séso pau kopo tedu [or dhéko] ta’a olo A person who (despite changed circumstances) continues to take after his or her parent A proverb, the expression is most often applied to a woman who misbehaves sexually, having affairs with other men even after she has married and moved to her husband’s residence (the new “enclosure,” a stone corral or other place where buffalo are stalled), thus taking after her mother or, perhaps, another senior female relative. Commentators compared the usage to a botanical metaphor, although one that applies equally to men. This is “fruit that does not fall far from the tree” (ze’a bedhu mona zeu ena pu’u ngata), a usage that replicates the virtually identical English proverb “the apple does not fall far from the tree.” Both Nage usages are significant as they attest to a conception of negative character traits or tendencies being inherited from parents. How far this is thought to derive from example as opposed to something passed physically from parent to child is difficult to say. However, Nage do possess an idea of physical inheritance, expressed in metaphors of “blood” (‘a) and “seed” (wini). The present expression is heard in variant forms. Sometimes “old ways” (ta’a olo, or “what is old, past”) is replaced by wini ta’a olo, “old seed,” in which respect it is noteworthy that “seed” refers metaphorically to women, especially women transferred in marriage. Understood as a reference to parents or ascendants, dhi (more generally “side, edge”) should be compared to dhi ‘a, “side of the blood,” a term contextually applied to ancestors in general or, specifically, to lineal ascendants through women. Tedu and dhéko

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

59

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 60

(“to follow, succeed”) are synonyms. The referent of kawa is somewhat uncertain, although most commentators understood it as a particular place: Kawa Labo, in the Labo (Lambo) district to the northeast of central Nage. Together with the fact that lépa is a deictic directional term used in Géro and other areas to the northeast (and equivalent to central Nage zale), this would suggest that the proverb is adopted from elsewhere. Kawa is also interpretable as “cave, rock shelter” (more completely kawa so), places where buffalo released to graze freely, as well as feral buffalo, often take shelter. On the other hand, the occurrence of Labo as a geographical name in a similar metaphor for disobedient wives (No. 87) suggests a synecdochical reference to any distant place. 12. Buffalo that blocks the wallow Bhada pe poma Someone who prevents others from joining in what he or she is doing, a monopoliser who wants to keep something all for him- or herself Pe is a contracted form of péle, “to block, bar, obstruct; to lie athwart” (see chapter 2). As the phrase describes a buffalo wallowing in a muddy pool (poma) that obstructs other buffalo from entering, it is comparable to the English animal metaphors “to hog (something)” and “road hog.” Also similar is English “dog in the manger,” derived from one of Aesop’s fables (Palmatier 1995, 116), although this specifically refers to someone who keeps others from partaking of or enjoying something that the person him- or herself does not want or cannot make use of. 13. Buffalo that wrecks its enclosure Bhada léga oka People who cause trouble within their own house or settlement or do damage to their own group The phrase can also be used more generally for a troublemaker. Oka denotes a temporary enclosure of bamboo, obviously more fragile and more easily damaged than a stone corral (kopo), and can more specifically refer to an enclosure built for a single buffalo destined for sacrifice or one housing a feral buffalo or horse one wishes to break or tame. In the present usage, the buffalo’s enclosure refers less to a physical house or village than to a social group,

60

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 61

the unity of which a troublesome person can damage. The Nage metaphor is thus effectively synonymous with English “fouling one’s own nest,” meaning “to disgrace your own family; to destroy your own environment” (Palmatier 1995, 155). 14. Buffalo thinking of its calf Bhada he ana A mother or father closely attached to her or his children The metaphor more particularly expresses what Nage consider unusual or excessive parental affection and is mostly applied to situations in which parental love or attachment becomes a particular issue. For example, one man used it in mildly rebuking his wife who was habitually reluctant to leave their young children in the care of others when she had to leave home for any length of time. Another instance concerned a man whose wife had left him and, somewhat unusually, insisted on retaining the children. According to one interpretation, buffalo are the appropriate animal vehicle because cow buffalo become aggressive when one attempts to separate them from unweaned calves and will make great efforts to return to them. In another view, the selection of buffalo mostly reflects their status as the most valuable and largest of livestock. 15. Buffalo tied by the horns Bhada ike tadu A recalcitrant or rebellious person who will not accept what others say and is difficult to persuade If a rope is tied to a buffalo’s horns, as is done in the sacrificial procedure known as pa sése where the animals are slaughtered while running relatively freely on the end of a long cable, the animal is unlikely to follow when one pulls on the rope and is likely to struggle – in contrast to a buffalo tethered by a nose-ring (No. 7). 16. Buffalo in foul-smelling water Bhada ae wau A person who is discontent and so appears angry or dissatisfied

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

61

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 62

The usual reference is a man or woman who is by nature generally discontented or dissatisfied – a curmudgeon or carper whom others try to avoid. But it more specifically refers to a facial expression suggesting anger, dissatisfaction, or disgruntlement and so can also designate a temporary or less permanent disposition (cf. English “turning up one’s nose [at something]”). The metaphor describes a buffalo that, following one especially articulate account, goes to a waterhole to drink but finds the water dirty and smelly, likely having been fouled by faeces, and thus declines to drink. Waterholes or wallows are indeed often dirty and full of dung. But whether water buffalo are really as particular as the metaphor would suggest seems unlikely. 17. Buffaloes measuring (or testing) their horns Bhada zagu tadu Two individuals or parties testing their mutual strength in some competitive exchange The image pertains to two bull buffalo butting their horns against one another until one gives in. Accordingly, the phrase usually refers to two men or two groups led by men. One example is two young men sparring in the traditional pugilistic competitions called etu (Forth 1998); the expression is also applied to contestants who, in terms of age, size, and strength, appear equally matched. Another example is competitive negotiations between two parties over bridewealth, where the bride’s group (the wife-giver) may begin by requesting a large number of buffalo. The husband’s group then responds by requesting in return a large number of pigs and textiles (components of the wife-taker’s counter-gift) until an agreement is finally reached. At the beginning of negotiations, neither side will know for certain the capacity of the other to provide, so in this instance the metaphor alludes to an attempt to extract the greatest amount possible from the other party. 18. Cow buffalo that urges (or leads) others on Bhada metu ngati A provocateur; a tempter or temptress who leads another astray Examples of referents included a particular woman (now deceased) who, for a fee, would recruit men for sexual liaisons with young women, especially at festivals or other large gatherings where people celebrate well into the evening

62

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 63

or overnight. Another concerned someone who encourages others to engage in gambling games or to wage more than they are initially inclined to do. Nage explained the motivation in two slightly different ways. According to one, the metaphor reflects the use of a buffalo cow as “bait” to attract bull buffalo (including free-ranging bulls) either to mate or simply to draw a herd together and follow a herder – as is also done with other large livestock. According to another commonly voiced interpretation, a buffalo herd is always led by one or more female animals while other buffalo, including all the males, follow behind. Such a categorical claim would appear unlikely, although no one seriously questioned it, and I also recorded it in the Lio region. On the other hand, there is a further idea that, while the females go in front when a buffalo herd moves, they are driven by males that push from behind or occasionally from the side or towards the front and so ultimately determine the direction in which the herd travels. The Nage metaphor somewhat recalls English “bellwether,” referring to a harbinger, something that indicates or predicts something else, which originally denoted a castrated ram around whose neck a bell is hung and who leads a flock of sheep. As a harbinger, however, the ram usually evokes something positive whereas in the Nage usage the female buffalo is always negative. 19. Following the cow (buffalo), coming behind the mare Dhéko moka, tedu metu A man who resides temporarily with his wife’s family because bridewealth is not fully discharged Since moka (a young female mammal) and metu (an older female that has given birth) denote females of all kinds of larger livestock, “cow” and “mare” are somewhat arbitrary. Nevertheless, this can be treated as a buffalo metaphor because, while both buffalo and horses compose the principal part of a bridewealth, Nage always describe this as “buffalo [and] horse(s)” (bhada ja) and never the other way around, and also because they speak of horses in this context as accompanying buffalo (see No. 8). That the metaphor refers to a uxorilocally resident husband is explained by the fact that such a man follows his wife (represented by the female animals) and also by the fact that, moving from his own group to the woman’s, he travels in the same direction as did that part of a bridewealth already given to his in-laws.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

63

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 64

20. True bull (buffalo) Mosa laki Person of highest rank Although mosa refers to the males of nearly all mammals (Forth 2016, 151– 4), in this expression it is understood as referring specifically to water buffalo. The Nage relationship to buffalo is in several respects comparable to what Evans-Pritchard (1940) described for cattle among the East African Nuer, who similarly designate leading men as “bulls.” Laki is is related to words in other Indonesian languages meaning “man, male, husband” (senses of Nage haki) but in Nage means “true, genuine, legitimate.” As a reference to individuals, mosa laki always refers to men, specifically male leaders; however, as the name of a social rank, it can include women as well. 21. Buffalo cricket Cico bhada A large kind of cricket This is one of several folk taxonomic names in which “buffalo” (bhada) specifies the larger or largest of two or more sub-classes. Comparable English usages incorporating large domestic animals include “bull” in “bullfrog,” “bulltrout,” and “bulrush,” and “horse” in “horse chestnut” and “horseradish” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary; Palmatier 1995, 200). A smaller, edible kind of cricket is called “pig cricket” (No. 135). 22. Buffalo leech Mate bhada A large kind of leech A smaller kind of leech is called “chicken leech” (No. 287) 23. Buffalo flatworm Mage bhada A large kind of terrestrial planarian (or flatworm; phylum Platyhelminthes, class Turbellaria).

64

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 65

A smaller kind is simply named mage, this term also denoting the more inclusive category. 24. Buffalo basil Hasi bhada A type of herb Used as a spice, this is possibly Ocimum basilicum, or Great basil. As Nage explain, the plant is named after buffalo because its leaves are larger than those of two other sorts of hasi (hasi biasa and hasi lowo). 25. Buffalo coconut Nio bhada A variety of coconut palm So named because of its very large nuts, larger than those of other coconut palms (nio). The main contrast is the “dove coconut” (No. 407). 26. Buffalo ginger Lea bhada A type of ginger plant The largest sort, the plant contrasts to “dog ginger” (No. 113) and “chicken ginger” (No. 290). 27. Buffalo’s uvula Ngade bhada A sort of grass In neighbouring Ngadha, one referent of ngade is Paspalum conjugatum (Verheijen 1990, 34), a species of crown grass that, interestingly enough, sometimes bears the English name “buffalo grass.” Nage ngade means “uvula” (more completely known as lasu ngade), and two commentators suggested the grass was so named because it is similarly hard or tough and difficult to uproot.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

65

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 66

28. Buffalo testicle lemon Mude ‘ade bhada A large citrus The fruit is so named because it grows to the size of a buffalo’s testicles. 29. Buffalo testicle tuber Kéwa ‘ade bhada A sort of edible tuber The tuber is thus named because in regard to its size, round shape, and lack of root hairs it is seen to resemble a buffalo’s testicles. 30. Buffalo weed Bete bhada A kind of plant

Figure 2 “Dove” and “buffalo” coconuts (No. 25)

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 67

Verheijen (1990) gives “buffalo weed” (bete kamba) in Lio as Sida acuta, a flowering plant, and in Ngadha (bete kaba) as a flowering plant in the mint family (Lamiaceaae). Nage bete appears to have no meaning other than as a plant name. Kamba and kaba are the Lio and Ngadha terms for “buffalo.” 31. Earth buffalo Bhada tana A human corpse or soul turned into a sacrificial victim by witches The usage reflects a mortuary belief according to which cannibalistic witches (polo), living humans who have fallen under the control of malevolent spirits, will transform a newly buried person (either the corpse or the soul) into a buffalo and then slaughter and devour the animal in a nocturnal feast. Whether all recently deceased people undergo this fate is not specified, but Nage mortuary rites include acts and precautions predicated on this idea (Forth 1998). 32. Trough buffalo Bhada kana A pig sacrificed in place of a buffalo Kana is a container for pig feed. As the usage entails referring to a pig as a “buffalo,” it is clearly metaphorical. As anthropologists will recognize, the practice of sacrificing something of lesser value when a prescribed sacrifice is unavailable is widespread and is perhaps most famously and dramatically illustrated by the Nuer practice of “sacrificing” a cucumber in place of an ox (Evans-Pritchard 1956). Among Nage, substitution is not always possible and in fact is allowed only in critical rituals, such as when a buffalo should be slaughtered in order to counter serious illness. With regard to the concept of “earth buffalo” (No. 31), substituting a buffalo with a pig is apparently also possible among witches. 33. Buffalo’s back (hut) (Kéka) logo bhada A kind of building Used for storage or as temporary accommodation, such huts have both gable ends open and a pitched roof that notionally resembles a buffalo’s back.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

67

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 68

HORSE • Equus caballus • JA (dialectal jara) When exactly horses were introduced to Flores is not known (Forth 2016, 79–82). Apart from their use as bridewealth and in other contexts of exchange, Nage value horses as a means of transporting people and goods, and although nowadays they are being increasingly replaced by motor vehicles, horses are still used as mounts, and Nage, who are skilled riders, always use horses during the annual ritual hunt. All of these usages, as well as the general care of horses, are referenced in the metaphors listed below. 34. Coming behind the mare, Tedu metu. See Following the cow (No. 19) 35. Fine stallion Ja mosa modhe A handsome man Although modhe has the general sense of “good,” it more specifically means “good-looking” in regard to both men and women. In English, “stallion” and “stud” similarly refer to virile or sexually attractive men; however, the Nage usage concerns a man’s dress and demeanour as much as his bodily appearance. 36. Horse down in the plain Ja lau mala A person who lives freely or is unrestrained The usual referent is someone who travels about without good reason, being absent from home for several days at a time – a decidedly negative trait for Nage. The source of the metaphor is a horse left free to graze in the plains. Whereas central Nage villages mostly occupy the lower northwestern slopes of the Ebu Lobo volcano, mala (“lowland, plain”) denotes the lower-lying, less accidented and less inhabited area to the north, located in the seaward direction (lau, also translating as “down, downstream”). Although since the 1940s or 1950s parts of this region have been turned over to wet rice cultivation, this is where Nage villagers would formerly release horses and buffalo to roam freely. As this should suggest, “horse down in the plain” designates a

68

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 69

free-ranging horse that is beyond the immediate control of human owners. (It does not, I was assured, refer to feral horses, although these too were once found in the plains.) Because the metaphor refers to people who do not abide by social conventions, it is also one of several Nage usages suggesting a generally negative evaluation of the “seaward, downstream” (lau) direction (Nos. 87, 103, 164, 487). Related to this is a contextual use of lau in the sense of “outside” and of opposite spatial terms (zéle, “up”; zéta, “upstream, landward”) to mean “inside” – as when referring to the innermost part of a house or the interior of a village and, furthermore, all locations outside of Flores (as in lau Kanada, “in Canada”). Similarly, Nage associate the lau direction with witches, the ultimate human outsiders, who, contrary to prescription, are said to sleep with their heads pointing in this direction and to be buried thus (Forth 1993, 101). In addition, many people identified as witches in central Nage appear to derive ultimately from war captives and slaves formerly obtained from northern, and thus seaward, regions. However, in all metaphors where the direction term is linked with an animal, this either has a clear geographical or ecological basis or reflects lau as a reference to an outside or exterior place, thus none actually attests to a symbolic or non-empirical motivation bound up with an association with witches (see chapter 8). 37. Horse follows, Ja dhéko. See Buffalo goes first (No. 8). 38. Horse returning with a trophy head Ja nuka woko Someone who is extremely pleased or joyful, especially after having achieved something or proven victorious An alternative expression is “horse celebrating a head” (ja woko ulu). Woko denotes triumphal cheers uttered by hunters returning with the trophy heads of deer and wild pigs, and in former times with human heads after a military victory. More generally, it refers to celebratory rites performed after to’a lako, the annual collective ritual hunt of pigs and deer, or after a successful war expedition, when the severed head of the leader of the defeated party would be brought into the victors’ village. Commentators, however, described the metaphor as referring specifically to cheers and chants performed in connection with the annual hunt (probably because indigenous warfare and the

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

69

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 70

taking of enemy heads are nowadays things not experienced by anyone still living). At the same time, and as the dual application of woko (or woko ulu; ulu is “head”) should suggest, Nage represent the annual hunt itself as a form of warfare (Forth 2016, 105–6). After a successful hunt, one or more horses are used to carry animal heads, and these always precede the other riders. On their return home (nuka), the men chant and utter cries of exaltation, to which Nage say the horses will always respond by neighing, as it were participating in a celebration of the hunters’ success – possibly a response to either or both the sound of loud human voices or the smell of blood. 39. Horse that accepts a large rice container Ja sawo sa’a A person who is always ready to help, a willing person Sa’a are large plaited baskets in which newly harvested rice is placed for loading onto the backs of horses when transporting the rice from field to village. Besides “accept,” sawo conveys the sense of “to pick up, fetch” and “to be agreeable to, comply with.” The metaphor thus describes a horse that does not object and readily cooperates when a heavy container is placed on its back. 40. Horse that cannot be led Ja kido talo An obstinate or contrary person, someone who is not compliant Kido is “to pull,” and the phrase refers to leading a horse by a rope. The expression is generally synonymous with “horse with a hard neck” (No. 45). 41. Horse that dances to the drum Ja dogo laba Someone too quick to respond to an invitation The expression was explained as describing, more specifically, “a horse that dances as soon as the drum is struck” – or, more exactly, when drums and gongs (laba go) are played since drums and gongs are typically played together. As Nage further point out, horses do not actually dance (prance, cavort) in time to the rhythm of a gong and drum orchestra, or do so only

70

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 71

Figure 3 Horses about to be led to pasture (No. 40)

incidentally. Rather, a horse trained to dance will simply begin moving immediately on hearing the drum. Nage sometimes interpreted the metaphor more specifically as a reference to people who are not especially industrious – particularly in the context of collective labour in cultivated fields or in house construction – but who are always first in line when the call to eat goes out. Nage regard such behaviour as coarse, ill-mannered, and a sign of greed, and people are expected to display reticence and restraint whenever such an invitation is made, regardless of how hungry they might be. 42. Horse that will not stop when one pulls on the reins Ja edo talo A person who cannot be restrained

71

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 72

Denoting someone who in the English metaphor cannot be “reined in,” the metaphor is comparable, although not identical in its reference, to “a horse that cannot be led” (No. 40). 43. Horse wary of ledges Ja taku teda A cautious or hesitant person The metaphor’s specific vehicle is a horse that is descending a slope divided into levels and that hesitates at the edge of each ledge (teda). In regard to both humans and riding horses, Nage mostly regard such caution positively. Although taku more generally means “afraid, frightened, fearful” (cf. Indonesian takut), it is better translated here as “wary.” Much could be written about the Nage use of taku and the mental states it denotes, but it may suffice to note that fear is treated less negatively among Nage than among Westerners. As I have often observed among both Nage and other Flores populations, people are less reluctant to confess to feelings of fear, and saying that one is afraid of doing something is regularly given, and accepted, as sufficient reason for not doing it. 44. Horse whose mane can be stroked, pressed down Ja pou odu A compliant person Usually applied to someone of low status who is easily subordinated, the phrase was explained by commentators as referring specifically to a horse whose mane can be stroked forward, or against the grain. This is something that many horses will resist. 45. Horse with a hard (inflexible) neck Ja tengu dego A person unwilling to comply or who cannot be persuaded Referring to someone who is stubborn or obstinate (or “stone-headed,” ulu watu, as Nage say) the usage is more or less synonymous with “horse that cannot be led” (No. 40). Like this last expression, the metaphor expresses a negative evaluation and is apparently never used in a positive sense – for

72

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 73

example, to refer to a person of firm convictions. Although the Nage metaphor specifically mentions a horse, the expression is otherwise identical to English “hard-necked,” meaning obstinate or inflexible. 46. Horse with a long penis Ja lasu léwa An idle man who roams about aimlessly or without good intention The expression is usually applied disparagingly to young male loafers who wander about in groups. Although described as coarse and, according to some, is never employed by women, in fact I first heard it from a woman. “Long penis” is understood as an erect penis. As several Nage pointed out, when a stallion becomes aroused its penis emerges from the preputial sheath but does not become completely or permanently erect and so will sway up and down or from side to side – like young, idle men wandering hither and yon. As this should suggest, the metaphor is motivated not by the behaviour of aroused stallions but specifically by their penises, and accordingly the expression does not particularly allude to the sexual appetites or exploits of young men. As one man humorously remarked, “the male members of men described as horse with a long penis may be no more than a few centimeters in length and nothing like a stallion’s!” It is also relevant that “penis” (lasu) is commonly used by Nage men as a general term of abuse, often in a semi-humorous way, for other males of about the same age – as for example in the oft-heard kau lasu kau, “you prick,” or kau lasu ema kau, “(you are) your father’s penis.” Comparable usages are of course found in other parts of the world. 47. Horse with a soft (flexible) neck Ja tengu meku A person who is easily led or who too freely cedes to requests Obviously the opposite of “horse with a hard neck” (No. 45), the metaphor expresses the negative quality of readily giving in or, as one man expressed this, being “too willing to compromise.” As one woman explained, people who immediately cede to requests from outsiders may do so without giving sufficient thought to future needs of themselves or their families, or to how they will meet obligations to kin and affines, whose anger they may therefore later incur. On the other hand, the expression sometimes

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

73

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 74

has a positive referent, describing an accommodating person or someone willing to compromise. In either case the metaphor has two possible empirical bases. A horse with a “flexible neck” is one that is easily led or directed, but it is also one that, as one informant explained, “immediately nods” (siba nugu) in agreement. In this second respect, the metaphor is largely synonymous with one incorporating the beetle named muku te’a (No. 523), and in regard to both usages, it should be noted that, among Nage as among Westerners, nodding the head up and down signals agreement, acknowledgment, or understanding, while shaking the head sideways expresses the opposite meaning. Yet another Nage metaphor referring to giving things away too freely is “pissing on stone” (bhia cio tolo watu). As was explained, in this circumstance the urine runs away freely instead of being absorbed, as occurs when urine falls on soil. 48. Horse with its bridle removed Ja lua kume Someone who dives into a meal or who too hastily begins any activity Kume refers more specifically to the “bit” placed in the horse’s mouth, but the phrase generally describes a horse that has had its entire bridle removed after the rider, always a male, has reached his destination. Thus unencumbered, typically a horse will immediately begin to graze, hence the metaphor applies to a person who, on returning home or stopping work, immediately begins eating. As Nage explain, before beginning a meal (e.g., after returning from the fields), a person should relax for a while or clean up and perhaps change dirty clothing. In part, the metaphor is comparable to the English “to eat like a horse,” something that similarly carries a negative connotation. However, the Nage phrase also has the more general reference of someone who is impatient and in too much of a hurry to begin any activity. 49. Stick horse (and) dog adept at climbing, advance together biting (but) return kicking Ja tua lako lebi, kai kiki walo wedhi A person who receives assistance from others but later rejects or treats them badly

74

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 75

In a somewhat more specific interpretation, the metaphor refers to someone who gains the support of an erstwhile adversary in opposing a common foe but, after gaining victory, resumes his or her former dispute. Although the motivation is rather complex, it is nevertheless widely recognized among Nage. “Stick horse” refers to a child’s toy horse made from the branch of an Arenga palm (tua), while “dog adept at climbing” literally denotes a hunting dog that is skilled in ascending and descending inclines (lebi is “slope, hillside”). In one view, both terms can be understood as names given to individual riding horses, but this seems not to be essential to the interpretation. As commentators further remarked, a palm branch hobby horse will swing from side to side potentially striking anyone the rider passes, while similarly, a dog skilled in climbing is likely to collide with slower members of a pack when running up or down a slope. Thus both terms refer to things likely to harm companions. Although naturally denoting a behaviour of hunting dogs, “biting” (kiki, also meaning “to attack or kill with teeth and jaws”) is understood here as meaning hunting (together) and thus as equally applicable to both dogs and horses. On the other hand, “kicking” is obviously specific to horses. The common foes are, of course, game animals. 50. Horse without a stake Ja toka mona A person with too much freedom and who lacks direction Toka denotes a stout stake driven into the ground for tying up animals, especially in treeless areas. Nage understand the expression as pertaining to people who lack guidance, perhaps through no fault of their own, as well as to people who behave irresponsibly, ignoring the instructions or wishes of parents or others in authority. (In the first sense, a comparison may be referring to someone in English as being insufficiently “anchored.”) The metaphor somewhat overlaps with “horse down in the plain” (No. 36), but commentators disagreed about the extent of the difference. 51. Mare that consorts with a younger stallion Ja haki azi A married woman who shows especial affection for a younger brother or other younger male relative of her husband

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

75

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 76

The Nage phrase has two quite different interpretations. In the present instance, haki is construed in the verbal sense of “having (or treating as) a husband,” and its object is a younger male relative (azi). In reference to horses the “husband” is a dominant stallion, the leader of a herd that monopolizes the mares and drives off younger male competitors. As a metaphor for married women, Nage described the expression in ways that implied an excessive fondness or attachment and even an improper relationship (although not necessarily of a sexual kind) between the wife and the husband’s younger sibling. An alternative gloss of exactly the same phrase serves as another metaphor (No. 57). 52. Mottled horse, Ja kéla. See Speckled fowl (No. 281) 53. Pregnant mare Ja kada Someone with a large or swollen belly The expression refers more specifically to people who eat so much their bellies become distended, thus a greedy person. Kada denotes pregnancy specifically in animals. Applied to both men and women, the usual expression is “having a belly like a pregnant horse” (tuka bhia ja kada). 54. Ride a mare Saka ja metu To copulate (of a man), to have sex with a woman The metaphor plays on the double sense of saka, “to ride (a horse)” and “to mount (a female)” in sexual intercourse. The expression is often used sardonically, for example in reference to a man who has likely been engaging a woman in sex, or at any rate is described as having been so engaged, while he should have been doing something else. On one occasion it was directed in jest to me, when one morning I appeared unusually tired; someone observing this then suggested that I had probably spent the night “riding a mare.”

76

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 77

55. Stallion with many mares Ja metu woso A man who has (maintains relationships with) many women Insofar as “women” can mean “wives,” the metaphor is synonymous with No. 56. Denoting “mares,” however, metu should refer more generally to women, so that the phrase would also apply to a man with numerous sexual partners. 56. Wives like a horse Fai ja A man with several wives This is usually expressed as bhia fai ja, “to have wives like a horse,” or fai bhia ja. In both phrases, fai (“wife”) is understood in the verbal sense of “to have a wife, wives.” Another variant, and according to some the most correct, is fai bhia zu ja, roughly “to have wives like driving horses (mares)” (zu, “to drive forward, to herd”; see also ana bue bhia zu ja, “to have numerous girlfriends”). The specific source of the metaphor is stallions typically coupling with multiple mares. Since fai properly denotes a “legitimate” wife, the expression refers to traditional polygyny. But because polygyny is nowadays prohibited among Christian Nage, and therefore generally disapproved, the metaphor is now mostly used as a critical reference to the few men who, although formally converted, continue the practice, taking additional wives with bridewealth or inheriting brothers’ widows. The metaphor provides one of several examples in which a sexual relationship between animals stands for human marriage. 57. Younger brother of a colt Ja haki azi A very small or short man Unlike No. 51 (which is possibly a pun on the present usage), in this interpretation haki is understood in the sense of “young male mammal,” while azi (“younger sibling”) indicates an even younger animal, in this case specifically a stallion. Grammatically, however, the expression is ambiguous and so facilitates the different metaphorical usage described in No. 51.

77

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 78

58. Horse fungus (horse dung fungus) Fako ja (fako ta’i ja) One of several kinds of fungus The fungus (fako) is so named because it is commonly found growing in horse dung. Unlike other fungi, therefore, it is not eaten. 59. Young horse (or “little horse”) beats the drum Ana ja paka laba The sound of distant thunder The expression occurs in a planting song describing the imminent approach of the wet season. Whether “young horse” figures as a definite animal metaphor is however uncertain, and in fact ana ja is sometimes rendered as Ine Jawa, “Mother Jawa” (Forth 2004a, 187). The homonymous ja means “cool, cold,” but it is difficult to see how this might have bearing on the phrase.

CATTLE • Bos spp. • SAPI Known only by the Indonesian name sapi, cattle were introduced to the Nage region early in the twentieth century, during the colonial period. Whenever I asked Nage about metaphors employing cattle, I was always told there were none because cattle were new animals. In the same way, cattle, being still considered foreign, are not employed as bridewealth, although they can be slaughtered in place of water buffalo by wife-takers to provide meals for a bride’s party when the two groups come together to contract a marriage. Subsequently, however, I recorded two cattle metaphors, both described as very recent. These, then, exemplify a new animal giving rise to new metaphors, although since the animal has been present for some considerable time, these seem not to have emerged particularly quickly. 60. Balinese cow or bull Sapi Bali A coarse-mannered and insolent person

78

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 79

The metaphor has its motivation in the unpredictable and sometimes aggressive behaviour of Balinese cattle, domestic descendants of wild banteng (Bos javanicus), specifically in contrast to the characteristically calm and more even-tempered Madura cattle. Whereas Madura cattle were introduced early in the twentieth century, Balinese cattle appeared just a few decades ago and have now almost entirely replaced the Maduras. Before Balinese cattle were introduced cattle were by all indications never used as a metaphor, and it is therefore worth noting that this and the similar metaphor below (No. 61) apparently derive in part from the contrasting temperaments of the two breeds. A more specific variant of the metaphor is “to move like a Balinese cow” (la’a bhia sapi Bali), which refers to people who move quickly and carelessly, not looking where they are going and risking collision with others. 61. Face like a Balinese cow or bull Ngia bhia ngia sapi Bali A person with an angry expression This is also expressed more simply as “like a cow’s face.” One man claimed that both this and the other cow metaphor may be replacing deer metaphors (Nos. 167, 168, both referring specifically to male deer) with regard to what he and others describe as the similar habits of cattle and deer, moving quickly with their heads raised and immediately raising their heads whenever they see a human. He might also have mentioned that cattle are now the more familiar animal, and it would also seem relevant to these comparisons that, for some time, many cattle, and especially Balinese cattle, have become feral and are therefore encountered as “wild” animals. Another man remarked how, when Balinese cattle raise their heads, they appear angry and aggressive but are not necessarily so. Like many animal metaphors, accusing someone of having a cow’s face is a form of abuse and an expression of displeasure or annoyance rather than a reference to the actual appearance or any particular behaviour of the addressee.

SHEEP • Ovis aries • LEBU As sheep are virtually absent from central Nage, largely because they are not well suited to local conditions, the number of metaphors incorporating this

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

79

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 80

Figure 4 Balinese cow (No. 60)

animal is rather surprising. Sheep, however, are numerous in the north coastal region of Mbai and occur sporadically in areas further inland. And since, through marriage and otherwise, central Nage have maintained relations with Mbai and other more northerly regions, it is likely that these metaphors derive from places to the north. Sheep have come to be used occasionally in central Nage as bridewealth, in which context they are conceived as substitutes for goats, and their flesh is rated higher than goat meat. In a comparative perspective, it is interesting that all Nage sheep metaphors have a negative human referent and, moreover, that the English use of “sheep” for a timid person finds no echo in Nage usage. Curiously, the word for “sheep”

80

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 81

in Nage and other parts of Flores is related to Malay and Indonesian lembu, which denotes cattle (Forth 2016, 83). 62. Ram’s horn Tadu lebu A devious person Usually expressed as “like a ram’s horn” (bhia tadu lebu), the metaphor reflects the fact that rams’ horns are not straight but twist and curl. As in English, this and other Nage animal metaphors reveal the widespread conceptual metaphor whereby “straight” and “not straight” stand for moral virtue and its opposite (see Nos. 144, 206 regarding cat’s and civet’s tails). 63. Ram that strikes everything with its horns Lebu tolo degu An indiscriminate person Although lebu names sheep in general, Nage understand the phrase as describing a ram. A major reference is a man who is undiscriminating in sexual relations, not distinguishing between women who are permitted and prohibited (mona be’o pie zi’a). However, Nage also apply the metaphor to people who are undiscriminating in other ways, including someone who is generally intolerant of others. 64. Sheep (singular or plural) Lebu A person who heedlessly intrudes, passing between or among two or more people without caution or proper respect Usually expressed as bhia ko’o lebu lebu, “like sheep,” lebu is often reduplicated and in this case refers to several animals. According to Nage, the metaphor reflects the image of a flock of sheep mindlessly pushing forward regardless of what might lie ahead of them. A common English metaphor, of course, builds on the same ovine behaviour. A variant metaphor is la’a loza bhia ko lebu, “to move, wander like (a) sheep,” also referring to people, including children, who walk without looking where they are going and perhaps bump into other people.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

81

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 82

65. Sheep of Kebi, Kebi sheep Lebu Kebi A person from Kebi This is a retaliatory deprecation applied by ‘Ua people to residents of neighbouring Kebi, especially in response to the latter calling them ‘Ua goats (No. 73), and depicting Kebi folk as no more sophisticated than ‘Ua people. How far prosodic considerations affect this expression is moot as the metaphor’s major motivation is evidently the morphological and behavioural resemblance between sheep and goats and their generally close association in Nage representations generally. 66. Sheep’s diarrhea Loga lebu A very dirty or untidy person Sheep’s diarrhea is described as especially messy, smelly, and sticking to the body. Apparently it is this third characteristic, connected with the thick wool of sheep, that distinguishes the loose stools of this animal from those of others, so the metaphor evidently reveals the same motivation as “sheep’s placenta” (No. 67). 67. Sheep’s placenta Bau lebu A person dressed in dirty, shabby, or ill-fitting clothes, or someone who wears too many clothes A more elaborate expression of the same metaphor is sada hoba bhia ko bau lebu, “(to have) clothes like a sheep placenta.” According to an especially cogent local exegesis, when ewes give birth the placenta sticks to their long, thick wool and can thus remain hanging for some time. By contrast, the hair of goats, buffalo, and other animals is not nearly as thick so the placenta does not so readily adhere to the mother’s body. According to another interpretation, sheep’s placentae are bulky or “too large” (apparently in relation to foetuses) and are “wet, untidy, and dirty,” again by contrast to those of other animals. In regard to ill-fitting clothing that hangs loose on the body, a person

82

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 83

may be specifically described, for example, as “wearing a waistcloth or sarong (tubular garments worn by both men and women) like a sheep’s placenta” (tago hoba bhia bau lebu). As one man remarked, people who wear (too) many clothes – or are “bundled up” – may do so because they feel cold, especially early in the morning, or because they are unwell. Bau, “placenta,” is synonymous with funi, a term appearing in other animal metaphors. The more complete form is funi bau.

GOAT • Capra hirca • ‘USA (dialectal rusa) A Nage association of goats with deer is evidenced in the fact that the name ‘usa (or rusa) reflects a widespread term for deer in Malayo-Polynesian languages. This would indicate that deer preceded goats on Flores (Forth 2012a), but how long either animal has been present on the island remains unclear. The scant zooarchaeological evidence available for Flores reveals a date not earlier than four hundred years ago (Van den Bergh et al. 2009), but other evidence indicates the presence of both goats and deer in other parts of eastern Indonesia at far earlier dates (Forth 2016, 85). Although the comparative evidence from cultural uses of other animals is mixed, the occurrence of “goat” in three metaphorical names for plants (Nos. 81–3), a conventional association with dogs (No. 84), and a regular use of goats as bridewealth (Forth 2016, 141) could also indicate that Nage have been familiar with goats for some considerable time. 68. Bleating goats that hear one another, crowing cocks that answer one another ‘Usa bhe papa léle, manu kako papa walo People who live in adjoining villages This parallelistic expression describes two villages located so close to one another that, when the goats or cocks of one vocalize, those in the neighbouring settlement hear their cries and respond. Heard most often as part of formal declarations and in the recounting of clan and village histories, the phrases apply where people of one village have ceded part of their lands to immigrants, who then built a separate village close to that of the longer-established

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

83

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 84

group (Forth 2005). At the same time, the animal metaphors refer to human inhabitants of the two villages themselves and their obligation, as close neighbours, to provide mutual assistance, or to respond to (or “hear” and “answer”) one another’s needs. Cocks and goats are evidently employed because, apart from dogs, these are the animals most often kept inside or near villages and whose cries carry far. 69. Female goat butting, butting of female goats Puku ‘usa metu Someone who speaks thoughtlessly and in a way likely to cause trouble The phrase alludes to female goats, apparently unlike male goats, butting arbitrarily and thus ineffectually – the blows not hitting their mark and striking unintended targets. Accordingly, the metaphor refers to thoughtless speech that is tactless or, as one commentator put it, does not take account of people’s feelings. In one view it applies especially to women’s gossip, but the metaphor can refer to the speech of men as well. 70. Goat droppings Ta’i ‘usa A group whose members are residentially scattered or lack unity or solidarity The contrasting condition is “buffalo dung” (No. 6). The physical separation of people who are residentially dispersed directly parallels the excrement of goats, which – unlike the dung of water buffaloes – comprises small, relatively hard pellets that scatter some distance when they hit the ground. 71. Goat(s) in undergrowth, pig(s) rooting in vines ‘Usa ‘ubu, wawi koba A couple engaging in a clandestine affair or illicit sex Composing another standard parallelism, the phrases describe goats and pigs rooting about in wild vegetation outside (although possibly not too distant from) human settlements. This is one of several conventional metaphors expressing a Nage representation, and a more general conceptual metaphor, whereby illicit liaisons – relationships that do not involve a public agreement between two groups and are not contracted with an exchange of valuables –

84

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 85

are identified with sex acts performed outside of houses or settlements or, in other words, beyond the bounds of approved social order. At the same time, the forest (or “bush”) is in fact where encounters between people engaging in clandestine sexual relationships often do take place, among Nage as in many other societies. Additional metaphors alluding to the social and symbolic exteriority of illicit sex include standard references to the acts as taking place “in the middle of the forest, on the tips of wild plants” (kisa witu, lobo bene); “among trees, in rock crevices” (pu’u kaju, lia watu); and “in the middle of a journey, some way along a path” (kisa wesa, mata zala).1 The expression ‘usa ‘ubu wawi koba is considered quite coarse, partly because it can include forced sex or rape (poto péwu) rather than simply referring to people who engage in non-marital sex. The selection of goats and pigs as the vehicles of the metaphor possibly reflects the practice of keeping these animals close to villages, in contrast to buffalo and horses, which traditionally were released to roam free in “the plain” (see No. 36). On the other hand, whether this metaphorical use of goats instances a more widespread view of male goats as especially or excessively sexual creatures – as in the English metaphor “old goat,” referring to a (usually elderly) lecherous man (see Ammer 1989, 67, who gives “goat, goatish” as a reference to a “licentious or lecherous” male, man or boy) – is moot (see No. 80). Although “goat” and “pig” are usually not understood as distinguishing male and female participants in illicit relationships, pigs are associated with women in other contexts, for example as animals that accompany a bride as a major part of a wifegiver’s counter-gift, while goats are one of several kinds of animals used as bridewealth. Children of illicit sexual relationships can be identified as “offspring of goats in undergrowth …,” ana ‘usa ‘ubu, wawi koba, simply as ana ‘usa ‘ubu, or alternatively as “children of wild pigs” (No.120). In this last context, Nage identify the source as wild boars that mate with domestic sows. 72. Goat(s) jumping on companions ‘Usa dhoko moko A boisterous child, children creating a disturbance Moko means “friend, companion,” usually someone of the same sex. The metaphor involves a comparison of noisy, boisterous children with the habit of goats jumping on the backs of other goats, both males and females indiscriminately. The reference thus overlaps with that of “uncastrated goat” (No.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

85

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 86

80), and even though dhoko can mean “to mount (in sexual intercourse)” the expression does not refer to human sexual activity. As regards the animal behaviour that provides its vehicle, the Nage metaphor finds a noteworthy parallel in the ultimate derivation from Latin caper, “goat,” of the English verb “caper,” an abbreviation of “capriole,” meaning “to frolic, jump or prance about” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary). 73. Goat of ‘Ua, ‘Ua goat ‘Usa ‘Ua A person from the ‘Ua region; an unrefined, undiscriminating person Used by the people of Kebi, this is a derogatory expression addressed to the neighbouring ‘Ua people who, throughout central Nage, have a reputation for being coarse, dirty, and unsophisticated and having little respect for others. Commentators identified the metaphor’s specific source as an unruly goat that leaps hither and yon, enters cultivated fields, and causes damage. To this ‘Ua people may respond, “well, you are a Kebi sheep” (No. 65). Situated relatively high on the slopes of the Ebu Lobo volcano, ‘Ua was formerly home to a population of feral goats (Forth 2016, 84–5); however, the selection of “goat,” ‘usa, to represent ‘Ua people is in part evidently motivated by prosody. As used by other central Nage, the entire expression ‘usa ‘Ua, lebu Kebi (sometimes abbreviated as ‘usa Kebi, “Kebi goat”) lumps the two regions together, in reference either to people of these regions or, more generally, to people deemed to match their uncultured stereotype, and may refer especially to undiscriminating eaters, who by the same token may be judged as greedy or gluttonous. In this respect, the motivation for the metaphor was identified as the voracious feeding habits of goats and sheep and their tendency to overgraze, to the ruination of pasture. As in other Nage usages, the metaphor – or paired metaphors – turns on the similarity of goats and sheep and in this respect contrasts to the biblically derived English metaphor “separating the sheep from the goats” (Matthew 25, 31–46), which of course alludes to a fundamental difference. 74. Goat on one hill, dog on another (hill) ‘Usa sa wolo, lako sa wolo People who speak at cross purposes, someone who misses the point

86

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 87

Figure 5 Goat on a rock (No. 74)

When applied to an individual, the expression describes someone who, misunderstanding what another is saying, starts talking about something else or responds to another topic. The use of two different locations, specifically two different hills, is somewhat reminiscent of the modern English metaphor “not being on the same page,” although the Nage usage further expresses the disparity by reference to two different animals. The combination of “goat” and “dog” reflects the standard composite ‘usa lako, a category of Nage special-purpose classification denoting smaller domestic animals given by wife-takers to wife-givers on various occasions of affinal exchange (Forth 2016, 141).

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

87

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 88

75. Goat on the mountain side ‘Usa zéle lobo Someone or something that distracts a person’s attention Lobo refers to the Ebu Lobo volcano, whose higher slopes, as noted, was formerly home to a population of feral goats (see No. 73). Even so, seeing a goat on a mountainside in Nage territory has probably never been a particularly common experience. In other contexts, zéle lobo (“on the mountain”; where lobo has more the meaning of “peak” or “summit”) somewhat opaquely refers to an impotent man, but this appears irrelevant to the present metaphor. As “goat on the mountain” denotes a distraction or diversion – someone or something that draws one’s attention away from a task or topic of conversation, as the local interpretation has it – it recalls the English metaphor “red herring,” although this can refer more specifically to a deliberate diversion (see Ammer 1989, 228; Palmatier 1995, 319). 76. Goats eating (voraciously) until sunset ‘Usa sepa leza mena People working quickly and continuously to finish a task on time Often used as an exhortation, to encourage a group of people collectively engaged in agricultural labour to complete a task before nightfall, the expression draws on a practice of penning goats in the morning and returning the animals to their pens at sundown. This is done especially in cooler and damper parts of central Nage since, as Nage recognize, goats do not tolerate cold and moisture. Having built up an appetite in the mornings, goats released and taken to pasture after midday will then eat voraciously and without stop until sundown – as one man put it “as if they know that they will be penned again before nightfall.” Mena is the direction to the right of a central point of orientation (Forth 1991), but as this is generally to the west in central Nage, leza mena refers to the direction of the sunset. 77. Goat that enters a village ‘Usa kono bo’a Someone in an unfamiliar place or situation who does not know where to turn

88

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 89

The metaphor apparently reflects borrowing from the Indonesian idiom rusa masuk kampong, “a deer that enters a village” and reflects a misidentification of central Nage ‘usa (rusa in dialects to the northeast), “goat,” and rusa, the term for deer in the national language. One man described the expression as referring to a person who enters a village and speaks forcefully or loudly, but this appears not to be the general understanding (see No. 166). 78. Goat’s whiskers, sideburns Kumi ‘usa Men’s facial hair The usual expression is “having side whiskers, facial hair like a goat” (kumi bhia ko’o kumi ‘usa). At present, kumi is generally understood as equivalent to Indonesian kumis, “moustache,” in which regard one Nage man described the metaphor as curious “because goats do not have moustaches (kumi) but only beards (tébe).” His puzzlement apparently reflects both influence from the national language and changing hair-styles. Growing moustaches but shaving the rest of the face is a modern practice; formerly, when hair above the lip was regarded simply as part of a beard, there seems not to have been any separate word for “moustache.” A term specifying side whiskers or sideburns is accordingly kumi pipi (pipi, “cheek”), and Arndt (1961) glosses Ngadha kumi as “beard, moustache, facial hair.” 79. Male goat mounting a female goat ‘Usa dhoko moka A clumsy person, who bumps or rams into things or other people Moka is a young female animal that is full grown or approaching maturity but has yet to bear offspring. Recorded just once, a regular informant claimed the expression was the correct or original form of ‘usa dhoko moko, “goat jumping on companions” (No. 72), and he identified the motivation as a male goat’s habit, when driven by excessive sexual appetite, of mating in a rambunctious, disorderly way, attempting to mount a female from various directions. Again, however, although the specific zoological source is the sexuality of billy goats, the expression does not refer to sexual behavior in humans, and it is not clear how far it should be treated as a separate metaphor or a variant of ‘usa dhoko

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

89

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 90

moko. (Dhoko is synonymous with gaka, “to mount, mate,” specifically with reference to large mammals or livestock.) 80. Uncastrated goat ‘Usa mona keso An overactive or restless person Also recorded as “(having) a body like an uncastrated goat” (weki bhia ‘usa mona kesi), the expression usually describes people who are never still, who are always getting up, changing place, and moving about, and who thus disturb others. It can also refer to people who regularly change what they are doing or who do not stick to a decision and appear to lack conviction. Although the usage reflects the sexual behaviour of male goats that are still whole, it does not apply specifically or even usually to men who wander about in search of women and, in fact, is one of many phrases Nage parents use when reprimanding boisterous young children. 81. Goat’s beard Tébe ‘ongo A kind of fungus The name is peculiar, as ‘ongo (goat) is the Nage form of rongo, the name for goats in Ngadha and some Lio dialects (see also central Keo longo, western Keo yongo). 82. Goat’s ear Hinga ‘ongo A kind of brownish fungus The fungus is named after its fancied resemblance to a goat’s ear. Regarding ‘ongo see No. 81. 83. Goat testicle lemon Mude ‘ade ‘usa A variety of citrus The plant is so named because the fruit are about the same size as a goat’s testicles (cf. buffalo testicle lemon, No. 28). 90

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 91

DOG • Canis familiaris • LAKO Dogs are among the earliest animals brought to Flores and their significance in Nage life is manifold (Forth 2016, 86–92), so it is hardly surprising that among mammals the dog is the vehicle of the highest number of metaphors (35), exceeding even the water buffalo (33). In regard to relations with and especially treatment by humans, a difference is noticeable between more highly valued hunting dogs and ordinary dogs, but this contrast is not discernible in most Nage dog metaphors. 84. Barking like a dog Gho gho bhia ko’o lako ghogho A person with a harsh voice and who speaks a lot The expression translates more exactly as “to make sounds like a barking dog,” or “to go ‘bow-wow’ (gho gho).” Insofar as it refers not only to a harshvoiced person who speaks often but also such a person who speaks loudly, the usage is comparable to English metaphors like “barking orders” and “barking obscenities.” In English, “barking like a dog” can also describe someone with a loud, persistent cough. 85. Dog adept at climbing, Lako lebi. See Stick horse (No. 49) 86. Dog (and) pig Lako wawi A person who behaves like an animal, in an improper or immoral way Combining the name of a ubiquitous domestic animal and “pig,” which names both wild and domestic swine, lako wawi is a standard binary composite with several senses, the most inclusive being “mammals in general” (Forth 2016, 141). As a metaphor, it further suggests “animals in general.” Recorded instances include the admonition “do not be, behave like dogs [and] pigs” (ma’e bhia lako wawi) and “to have the nature of a dog [and] pig” (ngai zede bhia ko’o lako wawi). As regards this second usage it should be noted that Nage normally consider ngai zede (here glossed as “nature” but also interpretable as “mind”) as a quality exclusive to humans and do not employ the term when speaking of the characteristic ways of non-human animals. In referring metaphorically to animal-like behaviour Nage also employ other standard D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

91

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 92

binary composites conjoining animal names, specifically names of wild animals and nearly all denoting mammals, either in place of or as complements to lako wawi (pig [and] dog). These include: kogha wawi, “deer [and] wild pigs”; kutu bétu, “porcupine [and] Giant rat”; bheku meo, “civet [and] cat”; and ‘o’a ghoa, “monkey [and] monitor lizard” (see further Forth 2016, 140–8). 87. Dog from Labo Lako Labo A wife taken from a distant location or unfamiliar group Labo (or “Lambo”) is a district far to the northeast of central Nage, which, in this context, refers synecdochically to any distant region. The phrase is contained in a longer aphoristic expression, “purchase a dog from Labo and gunpowder will be wasted; command it to go home and it will run seawards (that is, in the opposite direction),” beta lako Labo tau loja ao, zuba nai nuka pau so (or dua) lau. Usually sung while circle-dancing, the phrases are a warning of the dangers of marrying a woman from a distant place or from a relatively unknown group as she may prove not to perform wifely duties properly. Nage commentators interpreted “wasted gunpowder” as bridewealth that is expended in vain, in which respect it is noteworthy that taking a wife from an unrelated group typically requires a higher bridewealth. As Labo is seaward (lau) of central Nage, pau so lau refers to the wife running home to her parents. Although interpretable as a synecdoche, “Labo” is probably further motivated by its assonance with lako (dog). Although dogs are one of the animals included in bridewealth (and thus given in exchange for wives), women are not generally identified symbolically with dogs, and in this context “dog” is evidently chosen as an animal trained to follow its owner’s commands. As Nage pointed out, dogs, and especially adult dogs, purchased from distant places or unfamiliar people may not have been well trained. 88. Dog has carried (something) away, carried away by a dog Lako padho A person inspired to do wrong, someone who is led astray The metaphor occurs as one of a pair of parallel phrases, polo péte, lako padho, “a witch has pointed the way; a dog has carried (something) away,” or “di-

92

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 93

rected by a witch, carried off by a dog.” The referent is someone who is influenced by others to commit wrong-doing, and the phrase is often used when admonishing another person not to follow the speaker’s example in reference to behaviour he or she now regrets. According to Nage, the metaphor derives from a dog’s habit of picking up things with its mouth and dropping or depositing these some distance away. It is the person influenced by negative forces – or (as one might say in English) led astray – who is thus described as being “carried off ” by a dog.” The parallelism of “witch” and “dog” in the longer expression may reflect a wider association of dogs and witches (polo), a connection consistent with the animal’s quasi-human status (Forth 2016, 88–90). At the same time, Nage identify witches with animals in general (Forth 1993; Forth 1998; Forth 2007a), and witches are not especially associated with dogs in the way European witches are associated with cats. In addition, the reference to a “witch” in the longer expression is equally figurative. A person exerting such negative influence is not actually identified as a witch, and the expression does not constitute an accusation of witchcraft, even indirectly. 89. Dog hiding at the edge of a path Lako buni dhi zala A person unable to conceal a meaning or intention A more complete form of the expression is pata bhia lako buni dhi zala, describing what a person says (pata) as “being like a dog hiding at the edge of a path.” Nage understand the phrase as referring more specifically to a dog sticking its head into vegetation growing beside a path – as dogs often do, when looking or sniffing for something – so that most of its body remains visible. The human referent, therefore, is someone who deliberately speaks unclearly or opaquely but nevertheless fails to conceal something that is evident to interlocutors or of which they are already aware. 90. Dog in need of a bone Lako no’a toko A person who keeps requesting something and persists even after several refusals No’a means “to require or want something (urgently),” like a small child who wants to be suckled or fed (to cite an example given by one commentator).

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

93

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 94

However, in this metaphor the word may partly be understood as involving a pun on noa, “to howl, wail” – as dogs also characteristically do. And it is interesting that, when applied to humans, noa refers especially to the crying or wailing of small children who, as in the above illustration, may vocalize in this way owing to hunger. 91. Dog mounting a buffalo Lako saka bhada A man of low rank who marries or cohabits with a woman of higher rank See “buffalo mounting a dog” (No. 10), describing the opposite relationship. Especially in the traditional society, the relationship is less likely to involve regular cohabitation and, thus, more likely to be less public or more clandestine than where a union involves a high-ranking man and a low-ranking woman. 92. Dog on another hill, Lako sa wolo. See Goat on one hill (No. 74) 93. Dog pissing at the edge of a path Lako suka dhi zala A person who does something inconstantly and ineffectually The metaphor refers more specifically to someone who begins something but is regularly distracted by other matters, keeps stopping to do other things, or does not proceed directly to a destination. As a result, the objective is not quickly achieved nor a task easily completed. Nage identify the motivation as the habit of dogs, as they go along, regularly stopping to urinate. A less explicit variant is lako suka téki, “dog that lifts its leg to urinate.” The expression is reminiscent of the English idiom “to piss about,” which appears to have much the same human referent although not clearly the same motivation. 94. Dog rubbing its arse Lako ‘oco ‘obo A person who does not remain long in a single place, who moves from house to house, or cannot sit still and keeps shifting about

94

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 95

The motivation of this metaphor is the practice of dogs rubbing their backsides on the ground or a house floor in order to relieve itching. Nage say dogs will do this in response to worm infestation, in which regard the action draws some sympathy. However, there is also an idea that the canine behaviour is inauspicious (pie) when it occurs close to where people regularly sit, in which case it should be counteracted or prevented by pouring lime on the spot. 95. Dog snatching coconut dregs Lako ca’o pe’a A person who misinterprets what one is saying People thus described might misinterpret or fail to understand other people’s statements because they do not listen properly or do not fully hear the speaker out. They therefore form an interpretation too hastily and “jump” to the wrong conclusion. The source of the metaphor is a dog catching coconut dregs in its jaws when a cook (usually a woman) throws these away after grating and squeezing out the flesh of the nut to extract the cream. As coconut cream is a common ingredient in Nage cooking, grating coconuts and squeezing the flesh are early stages of meal preparation. Although no commentator mentioned this, it would therefore seem that anyone, or any creature, who caught and consumed the dregs – matter of little worth – would not only be ingesting an inferior food but would, as it were, also be eating too hastily, long before the complete meal was fully prepared. Hence it is reasonable to surmise that, in this metaphor, consuming dregs, as a symbol of too hastily and thus improperly interpreting a person’s words, operates in implicit contrast to consuming a fully cooked meal. On the other hand, the contrast may simply be between discarded scraps and the complete meal, where the latter stands for the full statement that is neither heard nor properly comprehended. 96. Dog that bites everyone it encounters Lako kiki papa tuli A person angry with many people Tuli means “to drop in (on someone)” or “to stop by,” while commentators glossed papa tuli as “going to visit someone but dropping in on others along the way.” As papa can mean “side, direction,” here it may have the sense of

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

95

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 96

“on all sides.” Describing a dog that bites one victim after another, the metaphor refers to someone who is rightfully angry with a particular person but, unreasonably, vents anger on everyone he or she comes across. 97. Dog that falls together with the mortar Lako boka toto ngesu A childless person or couple Mortars are used to pound rice and maize, and when a residue of food remains inside, an unwatched dog may climb onto or into a mortar to lap this up. In the scenario described, however, the animal succeeds only in knocking the mortar over and falling with it. Although Nage never commented on the motivation, I suspect the metaphor entails sexual imagery, wherein either the hungry dog and the mortar both evoke the male penis (since both fail to remain standing) or the mortar represents the female genitalia. In other words, the expression may imply failure to engage in fertile intercourse. 98. Dog that is tame with everyone Lako tolo mau A compliant or extremely (or excessively) obliging person The metaphor is employed in at least two similar ways. It can refer to people who are friendly with everyone they meet in order to obtain favourable treatment or something they want or, alternatively, to people with little will or mind of their own who always do what others ask – including women who freely engage in sex with any interested male. Applied mostly to animals, mau means “tame” in regard to specimens of feral animals (e.g., buffalo or cattle) that are tamed for domestic use and ultimately for sale or slaughter, or to wild animals kept as pets. 99. Dog tooth Usu lako Human canine teeth As “canine” is “dog, doglike,” this is identical to the English metaphor. However, English “canine” can refer to the corresponding teeth in a variety of animals, whereas Nage employ usu lako only for humans – and of course dogs.

96

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 97

Interestingly, with reference to porcupines the same term refers to the animal’s quills, its primary defensive equipment and in this respect comparable to a dog’s canines. 100. Dog waiting for bones Lako no toko Someone who remains still, does not take action No in this context means “to wait, remain still” or, more specifically, “to wait in anticipation (of something)”; other meanings include “to coax or persuade” and “angry, annoyed” (probably a homonym). The phrase describes the manner of dogs, especially favoured dogs allowed inside houses, that typically wait patiently for humans eating meat to toss them scraps. In one instance, the metaphor was applied to a creditor waiting to be repaid, and in a similar vein it can refer to visitors who linger and stay beyond their time. But the more general reference is any situation in which a person might be expected to take action or respond to something but in fact does nothing. The metaphor does not definitely refer to patience as a positive human quality. 101. Dogs and cats Lako ne’e meo People who characteristically do not get along and are inclined to quarrel The phrase is virtually identical to English “cats and dogs” in the phrase “to fight like cats and dogs.” It reflects, of course, people’s experience of the mutual dislike that characterizes these two animals that commonly come into contact and sometimes conflict in or near dwellings. As a standard composite, lako meo (or sometimes meo lako) refers to animals that have regular access to the inside of houses – for example, in regard to the requirement that, when a corpse awaits burial inside a house, special care should be taken to ensure that no animal jumps over it (Forth and Kukharenko 2012). 102. Dogs barking at a monkey Lako ghogho ’o’a A number of people speaking against or angry with an individual

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

97

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 98

The specific source of this metaphor is a treed macaque pursued by a pack of hunting dogs. 103. Downstream dog Lako lau An undependable or unpredictable person The usage is generally comparable to “dog from Labo” (No. 87). It occurs in two longer expressions – be’o mau lako lau, “beware the tameness of downstream dogs,” and podi mau lako lau, “pretending to be tame (like a) downstream dog” – both of which suggest prosodic effects. Mau is “tame,” while lau (downstream, seaward) refers to any relatively distant place. As Nage explain, motivating the metaphor is the possibility that a dog acquired from a far away village, although it appears tame and even if it has lived with the new owner for some time, might yet suddenly run away and return to its original owner. In a specific interpretation, the expression refers to a woman who appears “tame,” or well-behaved, at home but misbehaves sexually when she is elsewhere. According to Nage, this is a danger in marrying women whose background is not well known. 104. Howling dog Lako ta’a noa A child who cries loudly and incessantly Often uttered in exasperation and employed in chastising noisy children, “like a howling (or wailing) dog” (bhia lako ta’a noa) is one of several metaphors referring to animal sounds that Nage employ for children crying. As applied to human vocalizations, English “howl” is a comparable usage. Among Nage, however, dogs howling are a death omen, so that children making such a noise may be experienced as particularly disturbing. 105. Hunting dog Lako ngeli Someone distinguished by special qualities or abilities, a superior person The metaphor is alternatively expressed as “descendant of a hunting dog” (dhi lako ngeli) and implicitly involves the previously mentioned contrast be-

98

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 99

tween hunting dogs and non-hunters. Hunting dogs of course possess valued skills that other dogs do not and so are accorded special treatment (Forth 2016, 86–9). 106. Manner of dogs Sa lako The canine position Denoting a human sexual position, the metaphor differs not at all from English “canine position.”

Figure 6 Newly acquired dog, chained (No. 103)

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

99

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 100

107. Nage dog Lako Nage A man with an excessive sexual appetite or one who is adept at persuading women to have sex The phrase refers to Nage men in general, especially when alluding to a particular reputation bound up with a traditional practice of engaging in non-marital (pre- or extra-marital) affairs (Forth 2004b). One commentator thus identified the source of the metaphor as “(male) dogs seeking intercourse” (lako ta’a cu). Relating more specifically to men in the vicinity of Bo’a Wae, the main village in central Nage, the reputation is sometimes advertised by Nage men themselves, and often with some self-satisfaction or pride. I once asked a man whether it was true, as I had heard, that he had two “wives” – that is, that he simultaneously cohabited with two women (or had done so until recently, before one had left him). He confessed to this, adding with a grin, “you know us Nage dogs.” During my most recent visit to Flores in 2018, I heard that young men in central Nage sometimes formed named “gangs” – evidently a modern phenomenon – and that one of these calls itself “Lako Nage.” The Nage usage exemplifies an apparently widespread association of dogs, and not just male dogs (see English “bitch” and “dog in heat”), with sexuality or strong sexual desire. Examples from American English are mentioned in chapter 2. On the other hand, it is possible that the Nage metaphor also draws on the use of dogs in hunting, where they run down and attack game animals (notably deer and pigs). Nage versions of the conceptual metaphors “sexual exploits = hunting” and “women = game animals” are further discussed below, in reference to one of the pig metaphors (No. 125). 108. Swarmed by barking dogs Lako ghogho gheo A person of whom many requests are made or against whom many claims are laid “Barking dogs” refers to the many people who place demands on a person. Despite its generally negative implication, as one commentator pointed out the expression can have a partly positive sense, referring to someone who is much in demand or who bears many responsibilities.

100

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 101

109. Waist like a dog shitting ‘Ége bhia ko’o lako ta’i A person bending over to lift a heavy object As Nage remarked, someone thus engaged is likely to strain at the waist and so in this respect resembles a defecating dog. Addressed to the person lifting, the expression is usually uttered in jest. 110. Sky dog Lako lizu Mole-cricket; night-heron This is a folk taxonomic name with two distinct referents. In regard to the mole-cricket, an insect belonging to the Gryllotalpidae and the more usual referent in central Nage, a comparable metaphoric name is Indonesian anjing tanah (“earth dog”), denoting the same creature. In both languages, “dog” apparently refers to the mole-cricket’s habit of burrowing, or digging holes in the earth. As applied to the night-heron Nycticorax sp. the term alludes to the bird’s harsh cry, resembling the barking of a dog and often heard at night. (Translating as “night raven,” Latin Nycticorax reflects a further resemblance of the heron’s cries to the croaking of a raven.) Identified as “sky dog,” the nocturnal vocalization of the night-heron heard around October is one of a number of chronological signs indicating the onset of the rainy season. Thus when they hear the bird’s cries, Nage say “sky dog looks after the rain” (lako lizu léghu ae uza, Forth 2004a, 12). In this context, the cries are further identified with another bird, the white-breasted waterhen, which is otherwise named kuku raku (see Nos. 416, 417). 111. Surveying dog Lako lao A kind of mantis This is another folk taxonomic name. Lao means “to inspect, check on, look over,” as in lao tana watu, “to look over, survey an area of land or cultivated field,” and lao ana wa, “to check on (domestic) animals, livestock.” But how exactly this pertains to the insect is uncertain.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

101

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 102

112. Dog chest plant Uta kasa lako A parasitic plant An unidentified plant described as growing on tree trunks. Uta is “vegetable, herb.” 113. Dog ginger Lea lako A kind of ginger plant This is one of three kinds of ginger distinguished by animal names (see Nos. 26, 290). By contrast to these other varieties, only the leaves are eaten and not the root. Whether this distinction motivates the name is unclear. 114. Dog’s tail Éko lako A kind of plant A lowland plant with very small flowers, the fruit (which are not eaten) resemble a dog’s tail. For eastern Ngadha, Verheijen (1990) gives the same phrase as the name of Mallotus ricinoides, and for the So’a language, Macaranga sp. 115. Dog’s urine, dog urinating Suka lako A kind of tree This is a tree whose fruit children like to squeeze; the fruit then squirts a small amount of juice reminiscent of the small amount of urine dogs emit whenever they urinate. The tree’s name thus reflects the same motivation as “dog pissing at the edge of a path” (No. 93) and does not refer to the colour or smell of the juice or any part of the tree. 116. Dog’s “elbow” Ciku lako Wood that is bent or warped

102

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 103

Referring also to the human elbow, ciku applies to the heel of a dog’s hind leg. The usage is reminiscent of the English metaphor “bent (or crooked) as a dog’s hind leg,” although the referent of this phrase is usually not physical. 117. Dog’s tongue Lema lako A length of cloth left hanging down from the centre of the abdomen when a man’s waistcloth (or sarong, a sort of tubular skirt) is folded around the body and tucked in at the waist That the tongue hangs from the mouth more often in canines than in other animals explains why the dog in particular provides the vehicle for this metaphor. 118. Sitting dog (hut) (Kéka) lako ngabe A kind of building A structure used for storage or as a temporary shelter (e.g., when guarding fields), constructed of two front posts and two shorter back posts, thus with a diagonal thatched roof sloping towards the back and reminiscent of a dog sitting on its hind legs.

PIG • Sus spp. • WAWI Wawi names both domestic and wild pigs, and Nage regard these (correctly, in an international scientific view) as essentially the same animal and as able to mate and interbreed (Forth 2016, 92–8). Accordingly, the following includes metaphors whose vehicle is either the wild or domestic animal, with the distinction, where relevant, being noted in individual commentaries. In view of the value pigs of both sorts hold for Nage – as major sacrificial animals and as counter-gift given in exchange for bridewealth in the case of domestic swine, and as a major game animal in the case of wild pigs – the number of pig metaphors is perhaps fewer than might be expected. Although twenty-five metaphors are recorded below, just sixteen refer to humans or

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

103

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 104

human behaviour (or in one case, a human body part), the others designating animals, plants, and objects. Several metaphorical uses of the pig – including “stupid as a pig” – have much in common with English pig metaphors (see especially Lawrence 1993). Not always does this amount to a complete identity, yet in view of differences between the role of pigs in Nage and anglophone culture, these similarities are striking and tend to suggest that cross-culturally similar metaphors can be motivated by inherent qualities of pigs as much as by, and sometimes more than, similar socio-economic or cultural values. At the same time, it is noteworthy that, unlike Westerners, Nage do not depict pigs as especially dirty animals, a status arguably accorded more to sheep (see Nos. 66, 67), and the only pig metaphor that mentions faeces (No. 131) – ironically in a crosscultural perspective – actually refers to human excrement. 119. Child of a village (domestic) pig, domestic piglet Ana wawi bo’a A man’s legitimate child Contrasting with “child of a wild pig” (No. 120), the metaphor is synonymous with ana au lewu, “children beneath the (raised) house, housefloor” – a place where, traditionally, domestic pigs were in fact often found. Like other metaphors (e.g. Nos. 71, 129) the expression reflects a general Nage representation of licit and illicit sex, or sex inside and outside marriage, as being prosecuted, respectively inside and outside dwellings or settlements. 120. Child of a wild pig, wild piglet Ana wawi witu An illegitimate child, child born outside of a recognized marriage Such children are more directly designated as ana loza, literally a “child of wandering (loza, ‘to travel, travel about without any definite destination or purpose’),” an expression alluding to the relationship between the child and the father (the “wanderer”). The same applies to the present metaphor, the interpretation of which thus agrees with the use of “wild pig” (No. 134) for a man who travels far and wide. A modern expression for an illegitimate child is “aeroplane child” (ana kapa co), although this may allude more often to women than to men who travel by air.

104

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 105

121. Dog (and) pig. See Lako wawi (No. 86) 122. Fat as a large pig Hume bhia wawi méze A fat, large-bodied man or woman Also expressed as having “a body like a large pig” (weki bhia ko wawi méze), the phrase is obviously comparable to English “fat as a pig.” On the other hand, it is not nearly as negative as the English metaphor – nor, indeed, is being “fat” (hume). In fact, so long as a person is not decidedly obese, hume among Nage often denotes a relatively positive quality, especially when applied to growing children. Although a person can be considered too fat, describing someone as “fat as a large pig” can accordingly be said in jest, or light-heartedly, and is not necessarily considered insulting. 123. Give birth like pigs, hatch chicks like hens Dhadhi bhia wawi, mesa bhia manu Bear many children Having many children is something Nage generally desire, and the phrase is thus employed in requests contained in speeches of offering addressed to beneficent spiritual beings. Although these do not include animal names, the same desire, and moreover the same complementary pairing of “pig” and “chicken,” is expressed in the ritual usages dhadhi bi, mesa kapa, “give birth prolifically, hatch in abundance” (applied to trees and other plants, kapa means “thick, dense”), and peni bi, wesi méze, “feed (poultry) so they multiply, feed (pigs) so they grow large” (see further Forth 2016, 66, 142) – phrases that not only express a request for abundant livestock but also for numerous children. In all these expressions, the pairing of pigs and chickens reflects the fact that these are the major domesticates kept and fed inside villages, where their care falls largely to women. 124. Like a pig Bhia ko’o wawi wawi A lazy, indolent person, who sleeps a great deal, or a greedy person

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

105

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 106

Referring specifically to a domestic pig and usually expressed as a simile, the combination of indolence (sleeping a great deal) and greed (eating a great deal) appears crucial to this metaphor, as it does to counterparts in English. Here as elsewhere, reduplication of the animal name (wawi wawi) renders a general, collective, or categorical sense rather than the literal plural, and in fact one can also say bhia ko’o wawi. On the other hand, a regular commentator claimed that one could not or should not simply say “like a pig”; rather, a speaker must specify ka bhia ko’o wawi, “to eat like a pig” – thus specifying greed rather than indolence – or bodo bhia ko’o wawi, specifying stupidity or obduracy (No. 132). 125. Pig in a vale of tui trees is struck by a blowpipe dart, hurrying to feed on Arenga palm dates falls down head first Wawi hobo tui gena ana supi, ‘aba pe wole boba tobhe ‘obhe A woman who is forward with men and in consequence becomes engaged in sex Lyrics to a circle-dance song usually performed in connection with annual pugilistic competitions (etu), the phrases, addressed by men to women, provide another example of the genre named pata néke, and, as is typical of this genre, the component metaphors have a definite sexual import. As all commentators recognized, the “pig” is a woman while the “blowpipe dart” is the male penis. “Hurrying in search of dates” is less clear but refers to an action of the “pig,” who, apparently in consequence of her desire to consume the edible fruit of the Arenga palm, is described not just as falling down but as falling on her face with her buttocks and genitalia exposed and sticking in the air. One commentator expressly identified the Arenga dates as a reference to a man or men. It may be no coincidence that, at the male pugilistic competitions where the refrain is sung, men drink copious amounts of toddy tapped from the trees that provide the dates. Moreover, the competitions, always held during the dry months from June to August, are recognized as a time of sexual licence, when young unmarried people (as well as some already married) seek out members of the opposite sex. As I discovered no definite significance for “vale of tui trees,” this specification appears motivated primarily by the assonance of tui and supi. Assonance is further evident in the combination of wole, tobhe, and ‘obhe. As is often the case in songs, central

106

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 107

Figure 7 Sow with piglets (No. 123)

Nage ‘aba and ‘obhe are frequently rendered as raba and robhe, thus pronouncing the /r/ that has been lost in this dialect but is retained elsewhere. In view of the identification of the penis with a blowpipe dart, the foregoing expression reveals the conceptual metaphors “sexual exploits = hunting” and “women = game animals.” Though not explicitly an animal metaphor, these find further expression in the Nage phrase zapa tuba, “to try out (one’s) spear,” referring especially to a youth’s first sexual encounter after undergoing the rite of “circumcision” (gedho loza). Here tuba, denoting a hunting spear, refers of course to the penis. Whether the metaphor implicates any particular kind of game animal is unclear. However, a comparable Sumbanese usage involves asking male adolescents, before they are circumcised, “how many pigs have you speared” (Forth 1981, 161), an idiom that obviously equates women with pigs. 126. Pig sitting on its hind quarters Wawi seze péga A person in a desperate situation bravely awaiting whatever fate befalls him

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

107

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 108

The phrase refers to a wild pig, usually a boar, that hunters have run to a state of exhaustion and that simply sits waiting for the dogs to attack, ready to strike back with snout and tusks and fight to the bitter end. Nage remark how pigs in such a state typically sit on their hind quarters after the manner of a dog or cat. 127. Pig slaughtered off-centre (ineptly) (Bhia) Wawi wela ghébhi A shrieking child, anyone who screams noisily and incessantly Nage slaughter pigs by striking them vertically with a parang in the centre of the head, from just above the snout to the nape (see figure 8). This should kill the animal instantly. If the strike is off centre, the pig will survive the blow and begin squealing (fi) loudly. 128. Pig’s nose Izu wawi Heel of the (human) foot The usage was explained as reflecting the fact that an adult’s heel (at least among traditionally bare-foot Nage) is hard and, unlike the softer toe end of the foot, can be used to break soil. Similarly a pig uses its nose, or snout, to root in the ground. 129. Pigs rooting in vines, Wawi koba. See Goats in undergrowth (No. 71) 130. Pigs wallow, Wawi jola. See Deer bathe (No. 163) 131. Shit (faeces) on a pig’s head Ta’i ulu wawi A despicable person A general deprecation, the expression draws on the traditional Nage practice of defecating on the ground, especially on a slope just outside the bounds of a village, in a designated place exposed to domestic pigs. The pigs would then consume the faeces, but sometimes a pig would come too close to the defe-

108

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 109

Figure 8 Slaughtering pigs in the traditional manner (No. 127)

cator, so that faeces would fall on the animal’s head. While not explicitly depicting pigs as dirty animals, like English idioms the expression nevertheless reveals some association of pigs with dirt. Recently, the practices enabling this metaphor have changed. Partly following government directives, most Nage nowadays employ enclosed latrines to which domestic animals have far less access, and pigs are usually tethered or penned. Still, the memory of former ways remains strong enough to make the image meaningful. 132. Stupid, ignorant like a pig Bodo bhia ko’o wawi A stupid or obstinate person Somewhat like the familiar English animal metaphor “pig ignorant,” bodo does not mean inherently unintelligent or dull-witted but has more the sense

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

109

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 110

of “slow to respond” and “obtuse,” including “deliberately obtuse’ – or “pigheaded” – as well as “ignorant” in the informal sense of “coarse, ill-mannered.” As Nage themselves recognize, bodo is semantically distinct from other words translatable as “stupid,” such as dhozo and jinga, which refer more to apparent mental incapacity or dull-wittedness. Although some commentators suggested the word may reflect borrowing from Indonesian bodoh, bodok (“stupid, dull-witted,” also “ignorant” and “indifferent”), this is unlikely, especially as older Nage affirmed that bodo has always been used in the expression. Also, bodo occurs in the western Keo variant bodo bhila wawi, though the Lio version, bongo ngére wawi (cf. Ngadha bongo ngongo ro, “extremely stupid,” Arndt 1961) employs a different term. Although the metaphor applies mainly or specifically to domestic rather than wild pigs, which Nage regard as mentally capable adversaries in the hunt, Nage discourse on pigs provides no evidence that they consider pigs as generally less intelligent than other animals, a point they sometimes made explicitly. This would seem to confirm that bodo does not simply mean “lacking in intelligence” and, additionally, that the metaphor is informed by other qualities of pigs, and specifically domestic pigs – for example, their apparent indolence – as much as by any imputed lack of mental ability. 133. Take back the pig meat Weda walo poza wawi Taking a wife from an established wife-taker According to their system of asymmetric marriage alliance, Nage should give pigs or serve pork only to parties that take wives, or have done so in the past. Accordingly, on occasions when affines formally meet, wife-takers can receive and consume only pork, while pork is prohibited to wife-givers, who then consume other kinds of meat, provided by wife-givers. Pigs and pork therefore “move” in the same direction as women; thus, to take a bride from a wife-taker is to take back something that has previously been given, thereby initiating an illicit direct exchange between two groups and confusing the distinction of “wife-givers” (moi ga’e) and “wife-takers” (ana weta). Instead of weda, “pull (out), retract,” one also hears ala, “to take.” A synonymous phrase for a direct exchange of women is tu bhei bhole soge wawi, “to stick a carrying pole through the legs of a tethered pig.” This

110

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 111

is less explicit but, according to general usage, expresses essentially the same idea, although it more specifically conveys the image of preparing to carry a pig to a wife-giver, a party that should be giving pigs to the carriers. Nage always tether the legs, especially of pigs given to another for slaughter, and then carry the animal upside down on a bamboo or wooden pole. (The number of men required to carry the pole is therefore used as a measure of the size of the pig given.) 134. Wild pig Wawi witu A man who is always moving around and therefore difficult to locate Motivating this metaphor, Nage note, is the ability of wild pig herds to cover a large territory in a short time and their habit of never remaining long in a single place. Denoting a negative behaviour, the phrase is sometimes applied in exasperation to a man one wants to meet but who is frequently not at home or in another place where one would expect to find him. “Wild pig” seems to be used only for men and never for women, partly because women are not nearly as mobile as men. 135. Pig cricket Cico wawi A smaller kind of cricket This is a folk taxonomic name contrasting to “buffalo cricket” (No. 21). Comparison with Nos. 136 and 137 suggests that factors other than the insect’s relatively small size, conceived by analogy to pigs and buffalo, may inform the metaphorical name. 136. Pig prawn Kuza wawi A kind of freshwater prawn A folk taxonomic term. Nage analyze the name as referring to the crustacean’s dark skin and somewhat humped back, both described as features also found in pigs.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

111

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 112

137. Pig wasp Fua wawi A kind of wasp A folk taxonomic that, according to commentators, may be motivated either by the wasp’s generally dark colour, similar to the dark skin and black hair of the majority of local pigs, or by its high-pitched sound, which resembles the squeal of a pig (Forth 2016, 251). 138. Wala pig Wawi wala A kind of spider, reputedly poisonous No one I questioned could say why “pig” (wawi) should appear in the spider’s name (see further Forth 2016, 338). Formally, the name is comparable to two names incorporating “dog” as the nominal element (Nos. 110, 111) and another two, also denoting arachnids, which incorporate “cat” (Nos. 157, 158). 139. Pig ‘abu ‘Abu wawi A kind of grass So named because it is eaten by pigs, the grass differs from a common sort called simply ‘abu. Verheijen (1990, 36) lists the So’a cognate rabu wawi as Cyperus (a genus of tropical sedges). 140. Pig’s saliva Lua wawi A kind of vine The plant is described as exuding a foamy liquid that recalls the saliva (ae lua) of a pig. Verheijen (1990, 37) gives an apparent eastern Ngadha cognate, rura wawi, as Cissus, a genus of woody vines. 141. Pig shit leaves Wunu ta’i wawi A kind of plant

112

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 113

This may be the plant called by the same name in some Lio dialects, which Verheijen (1990, 76) identifies as a species of Vernonia, a large genus of shrubs, some with edible leaves (Nage wunu). Nage informants disagreed as to whether the leaves of this particular plant could be eaten. 142. Pig bag Be wawi Large sort of men’s shoulder bag According to Nage, the bags are so named because a small pig would fit inside. Contributing to the term’s metaphorical character, such bags are not in fact used for carrying piglets, or at least not regularly, and on several occasions I noticed that Nage found the name humorous. 143. Red pig Wawi to Antares Although most Nage pigs are “black” (mite), some are of a colour classified as “red” (to). Located in the constellation Scorpius, the bright red star Antares stands opposite the constellation of the Pleiades (Ko, also denoting a net or net bag); thus, one rises only after the other has set and the two are never seen together in the night sky. As in other parts of Indonesia, Nage observe the positions of the stars in gauging the passage of the year and organizing agricultural and other activities, including the annual ritual hunt of pigs and deer. Like other eastern Indonesians, Nage also recount a myth relating how the two stars, often represented as an incestuous brother-sister pair, came to be permanently separated. Accordingly, Nage describe two people who always avoid one another, so that when one arrives in a place the other immediately leaves, as being “like the Pleiades and the Red pig” (bhia Ko ne’e Wawi To).

CAT • Felis catus • MEO, NGO NGOE Listed below are metaphors referring to both domestic and wild cats. By all available indications, cats were introduced quite recently to Flores, perhaps little more than 200 or 250 years ago. But despite the animal’s recent introduction,

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

113

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 114

Nage cat metaphors are relatively numerous. So too are other symbolic usages pertaining to cats (Forth 2016, 102–4), and it may be relevant in both respects that, owing in part to their value as mousers, cats are the one animal allowed free access to Nage houses. Wild or feral cats are distinguished as meo witu (“forest cats”), but nearly all metaphors mention only meo (“cat” or “domestic cat,” sometimes specified as meo bo’a, “village cat”). The one exception is ngo ngoe, referring to a particular kind of wild cat (No. 155). 144. Bent like a cat’s tail Léko bhia éko meo A dishonest person, someone who is not “straight” Sometimes expressed as an admonition “do not bend (be bent) like a cat’s tail” or “let us not speak like a cat’s bent tail,” the metaphor reflects the bent or “knotty” tails of many village cats (see figure 9), supplemented by the recognized contrast with the straight or straighter tail of Palm civets (No. 206), the vehicle for the opposite human quality. Even when cats have relatively straight tails, Nage say, these always turn up a little at the end. The expression obviously involves the same metaphor as English “straight” and “bent” (or “crooked”) as references to moral character – a conceptual metaphor that would seem to have a worldwide occurrence (Kövecses 2010). Also involving the body part of an animal, a more specific parallel is found in the English expression “bent (or crooked) as a dog’s hind leg.” 145. Cat biting its own tail Meo kiki éko A person who makes accusations against members of his or her own family; someone with a loud voice, a noisy person In the first sense, the metaphor also occurs in Keo, on Flores’s south central coast, where it refers to conflict or fighting within a group (Tule 1998). How such infighting is comparable to an animal biting its own tail requires no further comment. In the second sense, the term is used to describe small children whose crying or screaming is compared to caterwauling. Indeed, many Nage appear to understand meo kiki éko as referring only or mostly to the harsh, high-pitched, often drawn out, uncanny and disturbing vocalization

114

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 115

Figure 9 Cat with a bent tail (No. 144)

cats sometimes make, usually at night, and this they regularly identify as the sound of cats, or specifically a male cat, mating. Whereas this interpretation appears empirically well grounded, the phenomenon is further associated with witches. But this association plays no obvious part in the metaphor or its motivation.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

115

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 116

146. Cat burying its faeces Meo kamo ta’i A person who conceals wrong-doing The metaphor finds its motivation in an obvious and distinctive behaviour of cats. Here, “faeces” (ta’i) stands for anything negative that a person wishes to hide from others. 147. Cat evading (or fooling) dogs Meo do’o lako A person who is skilled at avoiding others or someone whom it is difficult to hold to a commitment Nage identify the source of the metaphor as a cat’s agility and ability to escape from adversaries with evasive movements and quick changes of position. As an example of “a cat evading a dog” one commentator cited a woman who, being pursued by a particular man, always manages to be absent when he comes looking for her. In this case, the woman was the “cat,” and the man the “dog.” But the expression can also be applied to a man. 148. Cat from Geo Meo Geo A pugilist given to scratching with the fingernails The expression alludes to a manner of fighting in etu (pugilistic competitions) reputedly characteristic of men of Geo (Géro) and surrounding regions, including Réndu and Dhére-Isa, who are reputed to let their fingernails grow for this purpose. Nage remark how this renders them especially dangerous opponents, and included in chants that accompany pugilistic bouts is the warning “beware the Geo cats” (be’o be’o meo Geo). Referring to a broader region to the northeast of Nage, Geo in this context is a synecdoche and, as Nage commentators themselves remarked, is selected because it rhymes with meo. Why cats are used to refer to people who use their nails as weapons is obvious; at the same time, the face of a competitor severely scratched in etu can be described as “looking like it has been torn by a civet” (ngia bhia bheku sasi; see No. 204). Men called Meo Geo are more specifically described as scratching

116

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 117

opponents’ faces with the left hand while the right holds the kepo, a sort of cosh made of buffalo hide and twine. It is only with the kepo that pugilists can legitimately strike an opponent and draw blood. (Drawing blood is a specific object of the competitions, and once a competitor starts to bleed, however slightly, the bout is ended.) As used by others, the metaphor “Geo cat” thus expresses criticism, but it is also used self-referentially. In 2017 I observed a mini-bus owned and operated by a Geo man who had named it “Meo Geo.” (In Flores, as elsewhere in Indonesia, all such vehicles have proper names.) A comparable metaphor referring to male inhabitants of an entire region is “Réndu monkey” (No. 236). 149. Cat gripping a chicken in its jaws Meo seme manu A person with a horrible, fiendish, or malicious facial expression, or someone who temporarily presents such an appearance Usually expressed as “a face like a cat gripping a chicken,” the metaphor derives from a cat’s habit of killing fowls, especially when insufficiently fed by its owners. As Nage remarked, cats look terrifying in this circumstance because their canines become exposed, and as one commentator remarked, the metaphor can accordingly describe, more specifically, someone with a “broad, ugly mouth.” Nage otherwise regard cats as physically attractive animals, yet, as anyone familiar with cats will likely agree, in respect to their teeth and claws cats present a savage aspect and hence display an uncanny ability of appearing pretty and evil-looking at the same time. The metaphor is one of many that can be used in derisive banter and thus applied to people who in fact do not particularly display the features alluded to. 150. Cat that conceals its claws Meo ta’a zoko kungu Someone who keeps malicious intentions hidden, a treacherous person The metaphor hardly requires comment. Cats are the only animals known to Nage with fully retractable claws. One man thought the expression may be a loan translation from a synonymous Indonesian national language phrase (kucing sembunyi kuku), but considering the obvious parallel between

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

117

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 118

hidden intentions and retracted claws, independent development is equally likely. In regard to human applications, the phrase is comparable to English “snake in the grass.” 151. Cat that moves its kittens Meo ta’a dhada ana Someone who disturbs or upsets an established arrangement Motivating this metaphor is the habit of mother cats moving their kittens from one spot to another. Nage say cats will move their litters seven times before settling on the seventh. (Including the spot where the cat delivered, this might imply occupation of eight different locations, the number eight for Nage symbolizing completion.) According to a specific interpretation, the phrase refers especially to a man who keeps moving his family about and who seemingly cannot decide where to live. 152. Cat’s face Ngia meo A frightening or dirty (human) face Usually phrased as “having a face like a cat” (bhia ngia meo), the metaphor is applied in two ways: to a face, especially a child’s, that is smeared with dirt and so superficially resembles the face of a cat with variegated pelage (marked with streaks, spots, or blotches), and to a person whose face or expression is terrifying or suggests ill will. In the second application, it can be understood as an abbreviated form of No. 149. 153. Cat’s waist ‘Ége meo A person skilled in evasion or avoiding things In a particular interpretation, the metaphor was described as applying to “slippery” people, clever at escaping blame or who, while appearing to be at fault, are always able to excuse themselves. Usually expressed as bhia ‘ége meo, “having a waist like a cat,” the usage derives from cats’ flexibility and their ability to enter narrow places, bend their bodies, and quickly turn or change

118

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 119

direction (cf. No. 147). In this respect, the cat evidently takes the place of the weasel in English metaphor, where “weasel,” the name of a similarly lithe and agile creature, describes an untrustworthy person, able to “get out,” or indeed “weasel out,” of things. There are no weasels or any members of the Mustelidae in eastern Indonesia. 154. Dogs and cats. See Lako ne’e meo (No. 101) 155. Large feral or wild cat Ngo ngoe Someone with a low, gruff voice An onomatopoeic term, ngo ngoe is the creature’s folk taxonomic name, and a person so described is usually specified as “having a voice like a ngo ngoe” (sezu bhia ko’o ngo ngoe). Most evidence suggests that the zoological referent is a large feral cat, and usually a male, although an alternative possibility is the truly wild Leopard cat Prionailurus bengalensis (Forth 2017b). 156. Spotted or striped cat Meo déto Something or someone ambiguous, not of a consistent or determinate character The phrase denotes a cat with variegated pelage, thus not consistently of a single colour. Combined with “mottled horse” and “speckled fowl” (Nos. 52, 281), it can refer to a territory divided among owners belonging to several different groups. Another application is a person whose character or background is unclear, difficult to make out. In this respect an interesting comparison is English “checkered,” as in a “checkered career” or “checkered past.” 157. (Untranslatable) Gogo meo A kind of spider Neither in this term nor the following (No. 158) is it clear why meo (“cat”) appears in the names of two spiders, although it is worth noting that the

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

119

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 120

word for “cat” also occurs in the name of a spider in the Tetum language of Timor (Mathijsen 1906; Forth 2016, 337–8). Gogo meo further denotes a kind of bogey represented by a crude mask blackened with charcoal and used to frighten children (Forth 2008, 32–6), and indeed cats themselves can serve this function, as when recalcitrant youngsters are told that a cat is coming to get them. 158. (Untranslatable) Kaka meo A kind of spider See No. 157. Kaka occurs, with varying local interpretations, in several other Nage animal names (applied to birds, fish, and lizards), and in the Manggarai language of western Flores kaka has the general meaning of “animal.” The name might therefore be translated as “cat creature.” 159. Cat’s claw Kungu meo A thorny vine Nage describe the thorns as tearing into a person’s flesh, like cats’ claws. 160. Cat’s fur Fu meo A kind of fine grass The grass is described as resembling the fur of a cat. 161. Cat’s tail (or cat’s tail tree) Éko meo (kaju éko meo) A kind of tree Verheijen (1990, 48) lists the same name in Endenese for both Neyraudia arundinacea and Pennisetum macrostachyum. As Nage observe, the magenta blossoms do indeed resemble a cat’s tail. English “cattail” refers to a quite different sort of plant, being the American name for the British “bulrush” – apparently another English plant name incorporating an animal name.

120

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 121

162. Cat’s whiskers Kumi meo A kind of plant The Nage phrase translates the Indonesian name kumis kucing, which Nage normally use for the plant and which, not surprisingly, they describe as a recent introduction. The Indonesian term is also used for what is probably the same plant in So’a, which Verheijen (1990, 28) identifies as Orthosiphon aristatus.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

121

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 122

4 Mammals in Metaphor: Exclusively Wild Kinds

DEER • Timor deer Cervus timorensis • KOGHA Given the value Nage place on hunting deer, the small number of deer metaphors is surprising: I recorded just eight, one of which, moreover, may be of foreign derivation while several others have similar human referents. A possible explanation may be found in details of Nage oral history, which suggest that central Nage have moved into regions where deer are available as regular game only during the last two to three hundred years. At present, deer occur only in less forested areas to the north of central Nage, and consistent with both observations is the evidently external origin of special terms associated with deer in central Nage, especially terms denoting growth stages, which reflect dialects spoken to the north and northeast. Also noteworthy is a lack of certainty regarding how long deer have been present anywhere on Flores Island (Forth 2016, 108–9, 327–8). 163. Deer bathe, (wild) pigs wallow Kogha poma, wawi jola People indulging in an abundance of palm juice (or palm wine) Composing a standard binary composite kogha wawi, “deer [and] wild pigs” are the most valued game animals for Nage and together form the object of the annual ritual hunt. The present parallelism forms part of a longer ritual request made when tapping Arenga palms (Arenga pinnata), especially when a palm is tapped for the first time. The ritual leader then requests that the

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 123

Figure 10 Hunters at a shrine, annual ritual hunt (No. 163)

palm or palms deliver an abundance of juice (toddy) – so much that deer and pigs will be able to bathe and wallow in it and that the trees will be swarmed by sunbirds and friarbirds, nectar-feeding species that drink palm juice (see Nos. 343, 412). Commentators disagreed as to whether the phrases refer metaphorically to human beings. However, the situation hyperbolically conveyed by the expression clearly refers to a great abundance, not of bathing water or mud but of palm juice, thus something to be enjoyed not by animals but exclusively by humans. As regards pigs in particular, the metaphor recalls the English usage “pig in muck” (see also “like a pig in clover,” Palmatier 1995, 236), referring to a situation in which people are “in their element” and thus experience great enjoyment or contentment. One regular commentator further interpreted the metaphor as referring to a woman who makes herself

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

123

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 124

available for sex with anyone and whose body is thus comparable to a wallow or mudhole (poma or jola), a place used by any animal wishing to take a bath. 164. Deer down in the plain Kogha lau mala Someone who acts without restraint, does not follow rules, and behaves without regard to others; an arrogant person One commentator linked the metaphor with the habit of deer that run freely with heads held high and apparently pay no attention to whatever they pass, an interpretation that recalls another deer metaphor (No. 168). Lau mala, “down in the plain, lowlands,” refers to the region where deer are found, a large part of which lies beyond the territory of central Nage proper. As noted previously, for central Nage, the direction named lau (seaward, downstream, thus to the north) holds negative connotations, and these are also revealed in other animal metaphors (Nos. 36, 87, 103). Before the twentieth century, Nage regularly waged war in several regions to the north (lau), from which they took many captives as slaves. 165. Deer glanced by a spear Kogha ghabi tuba A person who immediately flees from a place after being given a fright The metaphor describes a deer that a spear has just missed or wounded only slightly and that is therefore panicked into flight. 166. Deer that has entered a village Kogha kono bo’a Someone who finds him- or herself in an unfamiliar place or situation and does not know where to turn As noted earlier (No. 77) the metaphor may derive from the Indonesian national language. Its motivation lies in the nervous disposition of deer that, finding themselves caught in a place from which they cannot easily escape, will become alarmed and run hither and yon.

124

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 125

167. Lota deer Kogha lota Someone who behaves in a confused, chaotic, or erratic way; a person who appears nervous or ill at ease The metaphor is motivated by the behaviour of deer when alarmed or set to flight. Lota was first recorded in the phrase lota lata, understood as a synonym of ‘ila ‘ala, “chaotic, confused, startled,” but the meaning of lota alone is unknown to most Nage, and it is evidently not a local term. A few informants, however, described lota as a term for “deer” in other parts of central Flores, and, as I was able to confirm from subsequent fieldwork, the term denotes male deer in the Lamaholot dialects of the far eastern part of Flores and the adjoining islands of Solor and Adonara. Central Nage sometimes reduce kogha lota to lota – as in “(to be, behave) like a lota” – or lota witu, “forest lota,” in reference to which some informants interpreted the terms as denoting an animal of an unkown kind. “Forest lota” recalls Réndu and Munde rusa witu, “deer,” which distinguishes deer from goats, usually designated simply as rusa (Forth 2012a). 168. Male deer that keeps running not looking where it is going Kogha lota bholo ngada doa An ill-mannered person without regard for others In regard to this expression particularly, it is interesting that Lamaholot lota (see No. 167) refers specifically to male deer. Ngada means to “hold one’s head high,” as does doa in this context, so the two words together convey a single sense. (Bholo is “only, just, nothing but.”) According to Nage, a characteristic of people thus described is that they will ignore other people as they pass by, like a large buck not looking to the left or right as it runs freely. Both semantically and in regard to the animal behaviour on which it is based, the metaphor overlaps significantly with two other deer metaphors (Nos. 164, 167). Mature male deer, presumably because of the weight of their antlers, keep their heads raised not only when moving but also when standing still – like an arrogant person with his “head in the air.” However, while implying arrogance, the Nage phrase can simply refer to a lack of good manners.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

125

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 126

169. Deer rattan Ua kogha A kind of grass Despite the name, the plant is not a kind of rattan but a sort of thin-stemmed grass with very long roots that are difficult to pull up. Verheijen (1990, 43) lists the So’a cognate ura kogha as the name for Sida acuta and S. rhombifolia. 170. Deer’s hoof Kuku kogha A kind of small tree or shrub Described by one commentator as resembling a vine, the plant is so named because both the stem and the fruit are hard, like a deer’s hooves. The fruits are used in a children’s game called bedi koki.

PORCUPINE • Javan porcupine Hystrix javanica • KUTU Introduced by humans from more westerly Indonesian islands some four thousand years ago, porcupines have long been present on Flores and are hunted regularly. Hunting porcupines requires special techniques and involves speech taboos bound up with the animals’ status as possessions of forest spirits. However, Nage metaphors incorporating the porcupine are few, and none refers to this spiritual status nor (with the possible exception of the first listed below) to porcupine hunting. The fact that the central Nage name for the porcupine, kutu, is a homonym of their term for “louse” (see No. 531) is explained elsewhere (Forth 2016, 115). This may be the place to mention another practice concerning porcupines, one I have previously characterized as a “symbolic or metaphorical usage” (Forth 2004c, 433; Forth 2016, 151–9) and, moreover, as an instance of irony. When distinguishing sex in porcupines, Nage employ the sex differentiable terms for birds and other non-mammals, even though they are quite definite that porcupines are not birds but mammals and therefore speak of this as an extraordinary and puzzling linguistic practice. As a figurative usage, calling porcupines, in effect, “cocks” and “hens” is most comparable to the naming of certain animals with terms referring to other, quite different, animals –

126

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 127

for example calling the mole-cricket “sky dog” (lako lizu, No. 110) in the full knowledge that the insect is not a dog and resembles dogs only insofar as it dig holes in the earth. The parallel finds support in the fact that, just as molecrickets possess no other name, so applying the sex differentiable terms for non-mammals is the only way, or at least the only correct way, of verbally distinguishing male and female porcupines. 171. Blaming the porcupine, accusing the Giant rat, as it happens the male monkey is equally guilty ‘Udu kutu, pe’u bétu, laka ‘o’a mosa ta’a sala mogha A person (especially a man) who accuses others of wrong-doing but who himself participates equally in the same misdeeds Employed as a proverb, the expression has several variants. Sala (“to be in error”) is sometimes replaced by naka, meaning “steal”; other times naka or sala are left out altogether so people simply say ‘o’a laka mogha, “the monkey is in fact the same” or “has done the same.” In addition, Nage often specify a “male monkey,” as in the version given here. As the monkey represents a hypocritical accuser, the metaphor is virtually synonymous with “monkey scolding a pig” (No. 225) and indeed has the same meaning as the English expression “the kettle calling the pot black.” (A Nage botanical metaphor of identical import is pau ‘udu mude, “mango accuses the orange,” two fruits that are equally sweet, and equally sour when unripe.) Its motivation lies partly in the fact that all three creatures are wild animals that steal from cultivated fields, in which respect it is further noteworthy that monkeys usually do more damage than either porcupines or Giant rats. At the same time, since other animals, including domestic animals, also do damage to crops, the selection of kutu (porcupine) and bétu (Giant rat) together with the largely synonymous verbs ‘udu and pe’u appears decisively determined by prosodic considerations, as is the juxtaposition of ‘o’a (“monkey”) and mogha (“also, as well, equally”), and also mosa (where a male monkey is specified) – in each instance with regard to assonance involving the vowel combinations e//u, u//u, and o//a. Nevertheless, it is additionally significant that “porcupine” and “Giant rat” also combine to form a standard binary composite, kutu bétu, designating nocturnally hunted animals of similar size and shape (Forth 2016, 143). This suggests, then, that the basic opposition is between “porcupine” and “monkey,” as in No. 173.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

127

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 128

172. Live like a porcupine Muzi bhia ko’o kutu A person who leads a regular, orderly life The metaphor draws on the fact that porcupines, after going out in search of food, always return to the same hole and will use this hole over long periods of time. In this regard, Nage contrast porcupines to junglefowl (No. 367), and I first recorded the expression in the form of a customary admonition: “Let us not live in the manner of junglefowl, let us live like porcupines” (muzi ma’e bhia ko’o kata, muzi kita bhia ko kutu). Given the similarity of the names kutu and kata, prosody apparently provides further motivation for this association, yet the attributed behavioural contrast seems also to reflect zoologically accurate observation of the two creatures.

Figure 11 Porcupines in a cage (No. 172)

128

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 129

173. Porcupine digging, monkey breaking Kutu koe, ‘o’a sae A person who consumes things in a destructive and wasteful manner without any thought for economy The phrases focus on porcupines and monkeys as destructive crop pests. Porcupines will dig up whole plants to obtain the roots, thereby destroying the entire plant; monkeys cause similar damage, for example when they snap or break off the stems of ripening maize. 174. Small porcupine Kutu pudi A small, stocky, or well-built person Nage speak of kutu pudi as a particular kind of porcupine, distinct from a larger sort called kutu kua, but since only one species of porcupine has been recorded for Flores kutu pudi likely refers simply to smaller specimens, which Nage describe as typically fleshier than larger porcupines. A person described as being like a “small porcupine” is someone who is short but robust and well-proportioned, and the phrase is often applied to a young child who is plump and solidly built. In the latter case especially, the condition can be described as hume, usually translatable as “fat.” 175. Porcupine’s gall-bladder (tree) Pedhu kutu (lo pedhu kutu) A kind of tree Generally described as a tree so named because it tastes extremely bitter, like the gall-bladder of a porcupine, the bark is used to treat malaria and also as a contraceptive. One informant, however, described it not as a tree but as a kind of grass, though one also with a bitter taste and similarly employed in treating symptoms of malaria and illness of the spleen. For So’a, Verheijen (1990) provisionally identifies the plant name tuka kutu (“porcupine’s stomach”) as a species of Tinospora, a herbaceous vine. It would appear, therefore, that “porcupine gall-bladder” may refer to more than one kind of bitter-tasting medicinal plant. Nage also use the bark of the zita tree, Alstonia scholaris, to treat fevers apparently caused by malaria.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

129

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 130

FLORES GIANT RAT • Papagomys armandvillei • BÉTU In view of Nage familiarity with this remarkable animal, it is surprising how few metaphors employ the Giant rat. The species is the largest of the world’s murids (rats and mice) and is endemic to Flores. Distinctive in regard to its much greater size (up to eighty centimetres from head to tail), its aggressive temperament, and injurious bite – and thus the danger it poses to hunters and their dogs (Forth 2016, 120–1) – the Giant rat is distinguished in Nage animal taxonomy from all other rats and mice, collectively designated as dhéke (a category that can also include shrews). At the same time, although not classified as a kind of “rat” (dhéke), Nage recognize morphological and other similarities between Giant rats and other rats, and this contrast is exploited in three metaphors listed in the next section (Nos. 182–4). 176. Accusing the Giant rat, Pe’u bétu. See Blaming the porcupine (No. 171) 177. Belly like a dead Giant rat Tuka bhia ko’o bétu mata A person with a large, distended, or bloated belly As Nage remark, all Giant rats have large bellies, but the bellies of dead specimens are even larger, owing to bloating caused by putrefaction. For obvious reasons, the phrase is also applied to a glutton. 178. Giant rat in a cave whose belly is full of faeces, eats new sabi leaves (and) waits for the night when she will give birth Bétu lépa lia ta’i mo’o biza, sepa ngolo sabi kéze kobe mo’o dhadhi A promiscuous woman who consorts with various men and is therefore continually pregnant Yet another example of the genre pata néke (see chapter 2), these are lyrics sung while circle-dancing. Leaves of the sabi tree (Schleichera oleosa) are a common food of Giant rats. In at least two respects the phrases recall a buffalo metaphor (No. 11): lépa is a direction term used in the Géro dialect, while “cave, rockshelter” (lia) recalls Kawa, with the same meaning, though in No. 11 it is interpreted as the name of a particular place.

130

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 131

Figure 12 Dog with Giant rat (No. 176)

179. Giant rat’s belly Tuka bétu An ingrate; a person with a large, bloated belly In the second sense the phrase is synonymous with No. 177. With regard to the first, commentators remarked how, as very large, herbivorous rodents, Giant rats eat a great deal but also produce large amounts of faeces, so that someone whose “belly” is like a Giant rat’s similarly receives positive things (such as material help or favours) but reciprocates with bad behaviour. Nage might thus reprimand such a person by saying “I give you food, (but) your belly is like that of a Giant rat; you treat me badly” (nga’o ti’i kau ka, tuka kau tuka bétu, kau tau ‘é’e wai nga’o). The usage somewhat recalls the English metaphor “nourish a snake (or viper) in one’s bosom,” an expression deriving from the Aesop’s fable in which a farmer places a frozen viper inside his shirt

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

131

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 132

Figure 13 Hunter with Giant rat (No. 179)

to revive it but, after the creature recovers, is “rewarded” by the snake’s biting him (cited by Palmatier 1995, 271).

RATS and MICE (or “murids”) • Muridae • DHÉKE As a conventional metaphor, dhéke is unusual insofar as the category has been interpreted as a folk-intermediate (Forth 2012b; Forth 2016, 122–3), a more inclusive taxon subsuming five folk-generics. Of these five, only two are explicitly named in murid metaphors. One is dhéke laghi (No. 192); the other is mucu ‘o, denoting shrews, which, although scientifically identified as insectivores rather than rodents, are classified by Nage as a kind of dhéke. Some

132

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 133

metaphors employing dhéke can be interpreted as equally referring to smaller “mice” (dhéke menge or ana menge) and possibly dhéke laghi as well. On the other hand, there is no indication that any rat metaphor specifically alludes to dhéke ngewo, a kind of large forest-dwelling rat. As noted, dhéke does not include Giant rats, separately named as bétu, a circumstance facilitating the metaphorical use of these two categories as contrasting terms in Nos. 182–4. The number and variety of Nage murid metaphors accords with their very regular occurrence inside Nage houses and settlements. Since dhéke covers both rats and mice, translating these metaphors into English poses an obvious problem (see Eco 2003; Forth 2012b), and although I have mostly identified “rat” as the more appropriate term, it should be understood that in some instances “mouse” would be a suitable alternative. In his dictionary of the neighbouring Ngadha language, Arndt (1961, s.v. dhéke) mentions two murid metaphors I never heard in central Nage. One is “like a mouse that steals grain” referring to “a person who quickly carries something away”; the other is “mouth like a rat,” meaning “to speak rapidly; to prattle, chatter, babble.” The second mostly corresponds to two Nage shrew metaphors (Nos. 198, 200), although Nage interpret these as referring to someone who talks constantly rather than rapidly. 180. Having a single testicle like a male rat Base bhia ko’o dhéke hase A monorchid, a man possessing only one testicle As discussed elsewhere (Forth 2012b), it is doubtful whether many Nage actually believe that all male murids are monorchids, and in fact the metaphor appears to be largely motivated by prosody – specifically, the rhyme of base (“monorchid”) with hase, a sex differentiable term specifically denoting male murids (dhéke). Although I have discussed hase several times in print, only recently did I discover probable cognates in Lio lase (cf. Nage, Ngadha lasu, “penis”), a term Arndt (1933) glosses as “male member,” and Ngadha lase, “testicles and scrotum” (Arndt 1961). A connection of Nage hase with lase seems confirmed by the further occurrence of the latter in central Keo as a special term for male rats, and especially old male rats (Forth 2018c), thus with essentially the same meaning as Nage hase. All these comparisons support my previous interpretation of the Nage term as having a specifically sexual, or more particularly genital, reference (Forth 2004c; Forth 2012b, 61).

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

133

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 134

At the same time, Nage will occasionally interpret base (“monorchid”) in the foregoing expression as a reference to an empirical feature in male murids, and, to that extent, rather than experience of animals providing the source of a metaphor, it would appear that the metaphor may have given rise to a quasi-empirical idea (Forth 2016). On the other hand, the expression is rarely used, if at all, to refer to males who are actually monorchids but functions instead as a pejorative uttered in ribald banter among Nage men. 181. Immature mouse (or rat) Ana dhéke Human biceps; an abrasion or reddening of the skin This is yet another animal term applied to part of the human body, although, in this instance, to a bodily condition as well. Expressed for example in ana dhéke gedho, “a little mouse comes out” (referring to the flexing of the biceps), in regard to its first sense the metaphor is virtually identical to Latin musculis, “little mouse,” applied to muscles in general and of course reflected in the English word. In its second sense the metaphor is recognized as deriving from the raw redness of naked newborn rats and mice. Of someone whose hands are red, from abrasion or friction, Nage thus say, “your hands are as red as a baby rat (or mouse)” (lima kau bhia ana dhéke). 182. Mouse (or rat) mocking a Giant rat Dhéke néke bétu Someone who derides or criticizes a superior person The phrase can refer to a child or young person who derides an older adult, or a low-ranking person criticizing someone of high rank. The metaphor is motivated by the difference in size between the Giant rat (bétu) and smaller murids coinciding with an overall morphological similarity, and in this and the two following expressions (Nos. 183, 184) I therefore translate dhéke as “mouse” in order to emphasize this difference. Although the usage clearly turns on an analogy between the two animals and distinctions of social position, prosody has evidently influenced the selection of néke (in this context best translated as “mock”) as a reference to the action of the smaller rodent (dhéke).

134

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 135

183. Mouse (or rat) taking care of a Giant rat Dhéke pagha bétu A person who looks after a member of another community or group Pagha, “to care or provide for, to raise,” describes caring for both children and animals. As one commentator pointed out, while denoting physically very similar creatures dhéke and bétu nonetheless name two different sorts of animals. Thus the metaphor typically refers to someone who assists a person he or she is not normally obligated to assist. As Giant rats (bétu) are significantly larger and also more aggressive than other rats and mice (dhéke), the metaphor applies especially to helping people who are quite capable of caring for themselves, more capable even than the one who gives assistance and who may do so at the cost of giving less support to people to whom she/he is socially closer, including members of her/his own family. 184. Mouse (or rat) turned into a Giant rat Dhéke bale bétu A person who changes position on an issue; people of low rank who act as though they were of high rank Commentators offered two different interpretations of this usage, but both obviously reflecting the same physical contrast between Giant rats and other murids and their folk taxonomic treatment as essentially different animals. That it is the smaller animal that transforms into the larger is of course especially relevant to the second use, which Nage explained as a synonym of “the slave becomes the master” (ho’o bale ga’e) – another common expression that is not always employed literally. Especially in the first sense the metaphor can be expressed as “your speech is like, you speak like a (smaller) rat turning into a Giant rat” (punu e kau bhia dhéke bale bétu), and in one case I heard it used in reference to a man who claimed certain rumours were false but who – as the speaker pointed out – subsequently spoke as though they were true. While Nage entertain ideas about various sorts of animals transforming into animals of different kinds (Forth 2016, 276–94), smaller murids (dhéke) turning into Giant rats is not among these.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

135

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 136

185. Rat above (in a high place) Dhéke zéle Something or someone that distracts the attention of people engaged in conversation or another activity The phrase describes a rat or mouse that scampers along the rafters or some other part of a house. When this happens, everyone typically looks up and neglects what they are doing, so that their activity or conversation is disturbed. I first recorded the metaphor in reference to a cell (mobile) phone going off in the middle of a discussion. Subsequent ethnographic conversations of mine were disturbed by actual rats and were described in the same way. 186. Rat inside a bamboo rafter Dhéke loki A person who eats noisily; someone who talks excessively Loki are roof supports of giant bamboo. Not naming any particular kind of murid, dhéke loki refers to any commensal rat or mouse that gnaws into, enters, and nests inside a loki, where it continues to gnaw holes. The reference to a noisy eater alludes to the noise made by the gnawing rats. The second expression compares a noisy rat to a person who talks too much, thereby revealing matters that should be kept within one’s own group and exposing the group to harm from others. In the same way, holes made by “rafter rats” can cause rafters to crack and collapse and thus weaken a house, so the usage involves the same identification of a physical dwelling with a kin group – also contextually called a “house” (sa’o) – expressed in other metaphors (e.g., No. 187). 187. Rat that damages a house Dhéke ta’a ‘é’e sa’o A person who causes harm to his own group In this phrase ‘é’e (“ugly, bad”) has the verbal sense of “to make ugly, deface.” The expression necessarily refers to a commensal rat or mouse while the house is of course one inhabited by the rodent itself. Implicitly, like a rat that

136

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 137

ruins the house in which it lives, a person who, through words or deeds, does damage to his own group – by causing disunity or reducing the group’s reputation or weakening its position vis-à-vis others – also does damage to himor herself. 188. Rat with a broken placenta Dhéke funi beta A person who abandons a task before completing it Expressed as “speaking like a rat with a broken placenta” (punu bhia dhéke ta’a funi beta), the phrase can refer specifically to someone who abandons one topic of conversation and then begins talking about something else. Applied generally to mammals as well as humans, “broken placenta” describes a potentially fatal condition wherein part of the afterbirth remains stuck in the birth canal. No one could suggest why the metaphor specifies rats, so the selection of this animal would appear to be completely arbitrary. 189. Rat without an escape hole Dhéke ta’a wuwu mona A person who begins something he or she is unable to complete Nage speak of holes, cavities, and caves (all designated as lia) as always having, besides an entrance, a passage leading to another opening used as an exit. This is one sense of wuwu; another is “fontanelle.” Although I have never encountered the usage, it would seem likely that the metaphor also applies to people who enter into a situation or dealing from which they are unable to extricate themselves. The Nage phrase is reminiscent of “trapped like a rat,” but the English metaphor evidently has a different motivation, relating to human rat catching. 190. Rat’s face Ngia dhéke Someone who appears nervous or lacking in composure The metaphor alludes to the twitching face or snout of a rat as it sniffs the air. It can also be used to describe an ugly human face.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

137

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 138

191. Rat’s throat Foko dhéke Folds, fleshy segments on the human fingers and toes The phrase seems not to be so widely known as other metaphorical uses of parts of animal bodies to refer to (different) parts of human bodies. In one view, moreover, it should refer only to folds of the toes, where the toes meet the ball of the foot. The metaphor apparently reflects the small size of a murid’s neck rather, or more, than any similarity in shape between this and the folds in human digits. 192. Scampering rat Dhéke laghi Someone who is restless and cannot keep still As a folk taxon (more specifically a folk-generic), dhéke laghi (laghi, “to scamper,” “to spring [from place to place]”) names a particular kind of commensal rat (probably the Polynesian rat Rattus exulans) that Nage describe as especially active and mischievous. I recorded two possible applications: boisterous, misbehaving children who run hither and yon causing disturbance and who may be compared to scampering rats as a chastisement; and people who live an unsettled existence. According to one regular commentator, the term is also used as a metaphor for people of low status and in straightened circumstances. In this connection, he further noted how, in Nage animal taxonomy, dhéke laghi refers to a murid intermediate in size between the largest kind of commensal rat (dhéke méze, including Rattus rattus, the house rat) and the smallest (dhéke menge or ana menge, one or more species of mice Mus spp.). 193. Rat bells Woda dhéke A small plant This is possibly a species of Crotalaria, or “rattlepods” (following Verheijen 1990, 44, who gives this identification for a plant of the same name in a Ngadha dialect). The plant is so named because the dried seed pods, when shaken, sound like bells and are therefore used by children as playthings.

138

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 139

Woda, however, can also refer to testicles (usually called ‘ade), and, according to a different interpretation, the name means “rat’s testicles.” If this is correct, it may reflect a more general association of male rats with sexuality (see No. 180). 194. Rat’s ears Hinga dhéke A kind of vine or creeping plant Both in size and form, the small leaves of the vine are said to resemble the ears of a rat. 195. Rat jackfruit Mo dhéke A kind of jackfruit (Artocarpus sp.) So named because the fruit are smaller than other jackfruit, this is one of at least five kinds Nage distinguish by name. 196. Rat’s tail Éko dhéke A dead palm tree The term more specifically refers to old, dead coconut or (less often) areca palms with just a few withered boughs and possibly fruit left at the top, thus consisting of little more than the trunk and suggesting the tail of an enormous rat (see Figure 14). Expressed as éko te’u I recorded the same usage in the Lio region (Wolo Ri’a). The visible appearance of a rat’s tail identically informs English metaphors like “rat-tail file” and “rat-tail comb” (Palmatier 1995, 317). 197. Lips like a shrew Wunu mumu bhia ko’o mucu ‘o A gossip Although shrews (Soricidae: Suncus spp., Crocidura spp.) belong to the scientific order Soricomorpha (formerly Insectivora), their classification by

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

139

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 140

Figure 14 “Rat’s tail” (No. 196)

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 141

Nage with mice and rats (dhéke) recalls earlier English “shrew-mouse” and modern German “Spitzmaus.” The present expression is virtually identical to “a mouth like a shrew” (No. 198), yet several commentators interpreted it as referring to someone who spreads gossip, especially gossip that proves harmful to others. In the same context, one of my most regular informants mentioned the shrew’s long, pointed snout and reported an idea (which I never heard from anyone else) that the snout can penetrate the anuses of larger rats; accordingly, he added, rats are scared of shrews, despite their much smaller size. This idea possibly reflects the pugnacity of shrews, a characteristic that may have inspired the English application of “shrew” to an ill-tempered, sharp-tongued woman. With reference to the English metaphor, Ammer (1989, 127) describes shrews as “disproportionately fierce” for their size, “fight[ing] one another to the death over a morsel of food,” and as “so pugnacious that at one time they were thought to be poisonous to farm animals who [sic] happened to cross their path.” These traits were then transferred to a “person of unpleasant personality, particularly one who nagged or scolded,” a metaphor later restricted to women. Nevertheless, how far the pugnacity of shrews may inform its metaphorical relation to human gossips among Nage is uncertain. 198. Mouth like a shrew Mumu bhia ko’o mucu ‘o Someone who talks constantly A more exact interpretation is “person whose mouth moves constantly, like the snout of a shrew.” The metaphor may recall the English idiom “to rabbit (on),” used in Britain as a reference to garrulousness and possibly motivated by the similar twitching of a rabbit’s nose. According to another interpretation, the British usage derives from rhyming slang “rabbit and pork,” meaning “to talk” (Franklyn 1975, 112). However, the possible relevance of the twitching noses of lagomorphs is still suggested by the fact that it is not “rabbit” but “pork” that rhymes with “talk.” Contrary to what might be expected, the Nage metaphor does not additionally refer to someone who speaks rapidly, a habit compared instead to the sizzling of “sesame being fried” (bhia seo lenga).

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

141

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 142

199. Smelling like a shrew Ngudu bhia mucu ‘o Someone who smells bad The motivation is the unpleasant odour emitted by shrews. A feature of shrews mentioned most often by Nage, this smell is registered in the animal’s name, mucu ‘o, which apparently derives from moco, understood as meaning “(extremity of the) snout, muzzle” (cf. Ngadha muzu, muju, Arndt 1961) and ‘o (dialectal ro), interpreted as cognate with Ngada rou, “to smell, stink” (Forth 2012b, 56). 200. Snout like a shrew Kuba bhia ko’o mucu ‘o A person who never stops talking; someone with an ugly face The expression is largely synonymous with No. 198, but because it has a second interpretation, describing a person who in one sense of the English expression would likely be described as “rat-faced,” I list it separately.

CIVET Palm civet • Paradoxurus hermaphroditus • BHEKU Sometimes named “civet cat” or “toddy cat” (both erroneous epithets because the creature, although carnivorous, is not a cat), the Palm civet, an arboreal weasel-like animal, will likely be known to coffee-aficionados as the producer, by way of its digestive system, of what is known in Indonesian as kopi luwak, or “civet coffee.” Palm civets are familiar animals in central Nage, not so much for their consumption of coffee berries (though they eat these on Flores as well) but as consumers of fruit and as an occasional object of the hunt. Although the Palm civet emits a distinctive musk, which people described as strong-smelling but not particularly unpleasant, the scent has no significance for Nage – other than indicating a civet’s presence, especially at night when the animal cannot be seen – and does not inform any of the expressions analyzed below. By contrast, the animal’s distinctive high-pitched wail or whine is the vehicle of two metaphors (Nos. 203, 207), while two others explicitly or implicitly entail an association between civets and cats (Nos. 201, 206).

142

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 143

Unlike other eastern Indonesians, Nage do not attach any ominous significance to a civet’s wailing, at least not for humans (see No. 203). One largely non-empirical idea regarding the Palm civet is that males have more than one pair of testicles. The notion apparently reflects the animal’s possession of scent glands, which can be confused with testicles; and the occurrence of these in female as well as male animals accounts for the Latinate species name hermaphroditus. But the idea of multiple testicles is not essential to any Nage metaphor, nor is another notion – that, through transformation, civets can derive from aged flying foxes (fruit bats; Forth 2016, 127–8, 276–90). 201. Civet (inadequately) covering its droppings Bheku ta’i sesi An untidy person The metaphor refers, for example, to someone who scatters or leaves articles lying untidily about, not putting things away in their proper places. As Nage explain, civets defecate in various places, so their faeces can be found anywhere – unlike cats, which bury their faeces. 202. Civet in a dead Arenga palm Bheku one bobo A person who disdains the company of others The metaphor refers to a recluse who habitually remains inside his or her house and rarely goes out. The trunks of dead Arenga palms (Arenga pinnata), bobo tua, are common nesting places of civets. 203. Civet that wails surrendering its body Bheku noa noka weki A person who inadvertently reveals a fault or some wrong-doing The metaphor turns on the belief that a civet’s wailing or whining reveals that it will soon “give up” (noka) its body (weki), which is to say its life, and so presages the animal’s death. The idea of ceding as well as the closely related notion of conceding are therefore discernible in both the belief about civets and the metaphor’s application to the human action that it informs. In other

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

143

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 144

parts of Indonesia, a civet’s wailing is taken not as a sign of its own impending death but as a similarly ominous portent for humans. Some Nage say male civets begin wailing after they have developed eight testicles (indicating an advanced age), but this idea plays no part in the motivation of the metaphor. 204. Claw (rip or tear things apart) like a civet Legu bheku Someone who eats in a coarse, ill-mannered way; a person who consumes something, with little concern for economy, until all is gone Another, more specificc reference is someone who is given something by another to look after but who consumes it him- or herself. The motivation is a habit of civets, when they come across ripe fruit, of quickly devouring the fruit, rapaciously tearing (legu) it apart with their sharp claws (see figure 15, which shows a man holding a pet civet, with his arm wrapped in a towel to prevent being scratched). The metaphor is alternatively expressed as tolo legu bheku, where tolo means “all, everything.” 205. Scattered (like) civets, dispersed (like) monkeys Bhéka bheku, égha ‘o’a Members of a family or other kin group who fail to maintain unity in the face of adversity Partly synonymous with “goat droppings” (No. 70), the metaphor describes groups of monkeys and civets scattering in all directions when dogs appear, even to the extent that parent animals, according to Nage commentators, will abandon their offspring. At the same time, prosody evidently plays a role in matching bhéka (“to scatter, disperse”) with bheku (civet) and may even have influenced the selection of Palm civets, especially since these animals, unlike monkeys, do not occur in large groups and are often encountered alone or in pairs. 206. Straight like a civet’s tail Hemu bhia éko bheku A person who is honest and forthright

144

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 145

Figure 15 Pet civet (No. 206)

Sometimes expressed as a proverb, “let us speak straight like a civet’s tail” (gho bhia éko bheku; gho, “straight” can be replaced by the synonymous hemu), the contrast is “bent like a cat’s tail” (No. 144), and the metaphor partly reflects the association of civets and cats embodied in the standard composite term bheku meo. As Nage remark, by contrast to cats, and especially domestic cats, Palm civets have long, bushy, and relatively straight tails (see figure 15). 207. Wailing civet Bheku noa Someone with a fine singing voice or a person emitting a mournful wail from sadness or physical pain

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

145

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 146

The metaphor draws on a Palm civet’s high-pitched whine, a distinctive feature of the animal that recalls the sound of human weeping or keening. The second reference is most evident in phrases used to admonish children not to cry – for example, “you sound like a wailing civet, do not weep so” (kau bhia bheku noa, ma’e ‘ita nangi). For small children to cry too much or too long is deemed pie, “taboo; ominous, inauspicious,” as it can betoken disaster, an idea bound up with the notion that a civet’s wailing can betoken its own impending death (see No. 203). 208. Civet’s vulva Puki bheku A loop spliced at the end of a rope, especially a length of rope forming part of a horse’s bridle The artefact is designated by reference to a perceived resemblance to part of an animal’s body (see figure 16). Although referring to knots rather than a splice, comparable English usages connected with rope-work are “cat’s paw” and “sheepshank” (literally meaning “sheep’s leg” and denoting a knot used for temporarily shortening a length of rope).

MONKEY Crab-eating or Long-tailed macaque • Macaca fascicularis • ‘O’A (dialectal RO’A) As elsewhere on Flores, monkeys, introduced to the island some four thousand years ago, are common animals in central Nage and in many places pose a serious threat to crops. Not only are the animals relatively numerous, but, unlike other wild mammals, they are exclusively diurnal, and Nage commonly keep monkeys as pets. Given also their physical resemblance to humans, it is thus hardly surprising that monkeys appear in a large number of metaphors. In fact, among mammals, monkeys are outdone only by the dog and the water buffalo, and there are, moreover, more monkey metaphors specifically referring to human behaviour than there are either dog or buffalo metaphors. In addition, monkeys are used more often than are other animals to refer to human physical features and abilities.

146

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 147

Figure 16 “Civet’s vulva” (No. 208)

209. Dispersed (like) monkeys, égha ‘o’a. See Scattered (like) civets (No. 205) 210. Driving away monkeys, oha ‘o’a. See Scaring off cockatoos (No. 309) 211. Face of a monkey Ngia ‘o’a A person with an ugly or odd-looking face The metaphor is often used in banter or as a generic insult. Usually expressed as “to have a face like a monkey” (bhia ngia ‘o’a or ngia bhia ‘o’a), the phrase

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

147

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 148

was also recorded as a gloss of songi mongi, an unanalyzable expression denoting someone putatively possessing a simian face. A more elaborate variant is “a face like a monkey planting (gourds and cucumbers)” (ngia bhia na’a ‘o’a sewe). This was explained as alluding to “a monkey more ugly than other monkeys,” but what the activity described in the subordinate clause might allude to I was unable to determine. 212. Fingers of a monkey Kanga ‘o’a Someone with dirty hands, especially a child As informants remarked, unlike humans, monkeys never wash their hands before eating. Although the expression specifies “fingers” (kanga, a term also applied to the toes or digits of dogs, cats, and various other animals), monkeys are the only mammals Nage describe as having “hands, arms” (lima). 213. Hands or arms like a monkey Lima bhia lima ‘o’a A person possessing exceptional manual skill The expression refers to dexterity, for example in throwing and catching objects and, Nage remarked, especially concerns monkeys’ ability to grasp firmly onto branches as they move through trees. As is general in Malayo-Polynesian languages, lima denotes hands and arms without distinction, but, in regard to both humans and monkeys, in the present metaphor it refers more specifically to hands. 214. Head hair like a monkey Fu bhia fu ‘o’a A person with untidy head hair Fu denotes hair generally – and in regard to birds, feathers as well – but here refers more specifically to head hair (fu ulu). According to Nage interpretations, someone may have untidy hair like a monkey either because it is dirty and dishevelled or because it is soft or fine and so does not stay in place. Pae bhia fu ‘o’a, “rice like monkey fur,” describes stunted rice plants, the grains of

148

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 149

which are small and few because of disease or having been planted in infertile or poorly hydrated soil. 215. Large, elderly male monkey ‘O’a pode An untidy man of unclean or unkempt appearance Usually expressed as “looking like an old male monkey” (bhia ko’o ‘o’a pode), this may apply especially to a man whose beard is unshaven or unplucked. 216. Legs and arms of a monkey Taga lima ‘o’a A young man who is especially agile and energetic Like No. 213 the metaphor alludes to the quickness and skill of monkeys especially in climbing and moving about in trees. A more complete variant is suko bhia taga lima ‘o’a, “young man who has legs and arms like a monkey.” A comparable English metaphor is “climb like a monkey,” which according to Palmatier (1995, 82) particularly refers to the agility with which children climb and swing on monkey bars and other types of playground equipment. 217. Like a monkey fooled by the sun Bhia leza wole ‘o’a An older man who takes a young wife but dies not long afterwards The metaphor may apply more generally to people who think they have sufficient time to do or complete something when in fact they do not. Leza wole ‘o’a (“sun fools monkeys”) is a standard expression referring to the time just before sunset. At this time, the top of the volcano Ebu Lobo is still bathed in sunshine, while the lower slopes are already in shadow. Thus monkeys observing the top of the volcano, Nage say, will think there is still time to bathe before night falls, but since the sun sets before they come out of the water, they are left soaking and shivering. The idea, of course, turns on the image of the monkey as a trickster (further revealed in Nos. 220 and 225).

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

149

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 150

218. Masturbating female monkey ‘O’a ta’a kuwi puki A woman who pleasures herself Kuwi puki is “to pinch, squeeze the vagina.” Like the male equivalent “masturbating male monkey” (No. 219), the phrase functions as an abusive expression used mostly in anger. Since I never heard it used, it is unclear whether or how often the phrase is uttered by or addressed to women, but it is unlikely often to be addressed by a male speaker to a female. 219. Masturbating male monkey ‘O’a ta’a kési lasu A man who masturbates Like the female equivalent (No. 218), this too is mostly used to express anger or frustration with a person. Kési lasu means “to pull on the penis.” As Nage observe, while sitting in trees monkeys are never completely still and regularly pass the time playing with their genitals – hence the zoological motivation for both this and the previous metaphor. 220. Monkey and crab ‘O’a ne’e moga People who do not get along or who deceive one another Usually expressed as “like (a) monkey and (a) crab” (bhia ‘o’a ne’e moga), the metaphor is said to draw on animal characters in a traditional story. However, I never heard the tale, and indeed Nage I asked either did not know it or, if they did, could not recall how it went. In addition, some evidence suggests that the reference may be to another tale, “Frog and monkey” (pake ne’e o’a), in which a monkey tricks a frog but eventually gets his comeuppance, falling to his death as a result of a ruse set by the frog. Moga denotes a small freshwater crab and, if there is such a story, it will have been motivated in part by the crustacean-eating habit of Flores monkeys, all Crab-eating macaques (Macaca fascicularis). 221. Monkey breaking, ‘o’a sae. See Porcupine digging (No. 173)

150

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 151

222. Monkey carrying a gourd ‘O’a ka’o hea A person who is overburdened or takes on too much Hea appears to be Benincasa hispida, the ash gourd or winter melon, the fruit of which can grow up to eighty centimetres in length – obviously a heavy burden for even a large macaque. Ka’o more exactly means “to cradle (in the arms).” The metaphor depicts a monkey cradling a pumpkin it has stolen from a garden, which the creature finds too heavy and so carries with great difficulty. Generally referring to people who have “bitten off more than they can chew,” in one instance the phrase was applied specifically to women who have children in too quick succession and so give birth while they are still “cradling” a previous child – an interpretation evidently influenced by the specific sense of ka’o (“to cradle in the arms,” or in the case of a human mother, in a cradle cloth or sling). The expression is curious insofar as carrying a pumpkin with both hands would appear impossible for quadrupedal macaques, as Nage themselves recognize. One commentator suggested the phrase could be understood as describing two monkeys, each holding onto the gourd with one or both forelimbs and walking either three-legged or sideways. However, I never encountered anyone who claimed to have seen this, and the whole point of the metaphor may be to depict an activity that is virtually impossible. 223. Monkey leaping from tree to tree ‘O’a baki kaju A person who does not maintain a permanent residence; someone who jumps from topic to topic or does not complete a task before starting another The phrase can also denote a growth stage in monkeys, where a youngster begins to practise jumping from branch to branch, starting with the closest ones and then increasing the distance as its skills develop. The motivation is obvious, and, interestingly, the jumping metaphor occurs in one of the English glosses. Nage themselves recognize the several possible applications of the expression.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

151

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 152

224. Monkey roasting a crayfish ‘O’a ngae kuza A person who does something improperly and ineffectively; “any ineffectual practice or action that does not, or cannot, achieve a desired end” (Forth 2016, 132) As indicated by their English name, Crab-eating macaques (the only monkeys on Flores) do indeed catch and consume crustaceans. According to Nage, when the monkeys catch crayfish they will sometimes insert these in the ash or embers of fires set by humans when firing bush or fields, then pull them out and eat them. This activity Nage describe as “roasting” (ngae), yet, as they also remark, although the fires may still be warm, the action is quite ineffective and the crustaceans remain raw. According to one commentator, the expression especially applies to children or young people who attempt to cook without sufficient fire or serve undercooked food. If so, the usage is comparable to “scooping up dirt, playing with coconut shells” (aku awu, dhégha he’a), which refers to children at play imitating the cooking and serving of food, and is a metaphor for temporary, non-marital sexual unions, arrangements that Nage partly represent as a kind of “trial marriage” (Forth 2004b, 333). Other evidence, however, indicates that “monkey roasting a crayfish” refers to people who engage in any sort of ineffectual activity. The metaphor reflects one of several ideas that represent monkeys as imperfect humans and as readily fooled or tricked (Forth 2016, 129–34). Insofar as cooking is an activity exclusive to (mostly adult) humans, the expression also implies imitative behaviour and is therefore comparable to English monkey metaphors, including the proverb “monkey see, monkey do” and “to ape,” which, like the Nage metaphor, often refers to absurd or mindless imitation. Elsewhere, however, I have discussed evidence for primates consuming if not ash then wood charcoal as a dietary supplement or to counteract toxins in plant foods (Forth 2011). 225. Monkey scolding a pig ‘O’a sawi wawi A hypocrite, someone who accuses another of something of which he or she is equally guilty

152

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 153

The metaphor is synonymous with the English “pot calling the kettle black.” For Nage, the usage reflects the fact that both monkeys and pigs (both wild and domestic) raid cultivated fields, though monkeys do so from above – taking fruit from trees or descending from trees – while pigs do so from below. However, the similarity of sawi (to scold) and wawi (pig) suggests rhyme as a further factor possibly motivating the selection of this animal. In contrast, the selection of the monkey appears more substantially connected with its representation as a clever animal and a trickster (Forth 2016, 129–34) – someone who not only tricks others but is himself tricked – and it is noteworthy that, both in the present expression and a largely synonymous metaphor incorporating the porcupine and the Giant rat (see Nos. 171, 176), it is a monkey that represents a human hypocrite. 226. Monkey showing its testicles ‘O’a ta’a kela wola A man sitting with his genitals showing The metaphor derives from the common observation of monkeys sitting in trees scratching their genitalia. The expression is mostly used in friendly banter among men. Nage recognize wola as a Ngadha term for testicles (Nage ‘ade), so this is one of several usages incorporating words from other dialects or languages. 227. Monkey sitting halfway up a tree ‘O’a pu’u da’a A person who is not fully decided or is unwilling to commit completely to something Pu’u da’a (“source, origin, beginning of a branch”) refers to the place where a branch diverges from the trunk, and more generally denotes the lower part of a tree trunk, from which branches first grow. A monkey stopped at this point has gone only midway up the trunk and has yet to climb higher or out to the end of a branch. Thus an English comparison is describing someone as a “fence-sitter.”

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

153

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 154

228. Monkey that does not cling (to trees) ‘O’a mona kebhi (kaju) Something that is impossible or inconceivable Meaning “to cling on, onto, to attach (oneself) to” or “to be securely fixed (to something),” kebhi here refers specifically to a monkey’s great skill in climbing trees, jumping from tree to tree, running along branches, and so on. Comparable usages include kebhi ja, “attached to the horse,” describing a highly skilled rider, and kebhi watu, the alternative name of a freshwater fish that attaches itself to rocks (see kaka watu, Nos. 466, 467). Accordingly, the Nage expression describes a monkey that is “not at home in trees,” a condition contrary to the nature of monkeys and hence an appropriate metaphor for any aspect of a person that is impossible or difficult to conceive. 229. Monkey that has run out of trees ‘O’a kaju tona A person who has exhausted possibilities or is left without options Tona means “to have an insufficient amount of something” (see, e.g., ola ka tona, “to run out of food”). The metaphor invokes the particular image of a monkey fleeing from enemies and jumping from tree to tree but finally arriving at a spot where there is no tree sufficiently close to jump to. According to one interpretation, it specifically applies to an orphan or someone without kin who has no one to call on for assistance. Especially as this also entails animals (albeit domestic rather than wild ones), a comparable English metaphor is “to be at the end of one’s tether.” 230. Monkey threatening a dog ‘O’a luku lako A less powerful man who takes on someone more powerful This can concern either physical or social power, and the usual reference is a person, typically a man, who begins a dispute with another with little or no chance of success. As one commentator remarked, someone may act thus because he has an unrealistically high opinion of himself. The metaphor reflects the use of dogs in hunting monkeys and guarding fields against their depre-

154

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 155

Figure 17 Pet monkey (No. 231)

dations. Commentators also remarked how large monkeys will sometimes hold their ground against an advancing dog. 231. Monkey with its cheeks full of Job’s tears ‘O’a tébo ke’o A person with a mouth full of food; someone with fat cheeks or jowls Ke’o is the cereal Coix lacryma-jobi. In the first sense, the phrase refers to a greedy or very hungry person who takes too large mouthfuls. As Nage are aware, monkeys (specifically Crab-eating macaques) possess cheek pouches in which they hold food. A monkey with a distended cheek pouch can be seen in figure 17; it had just been eating fruit.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

155

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 156

232. Monkeys fighting over tamarind fruits ‘O’a tange nage Rowdy people squabbling over something As monkeys will fight over many things, assonance has evidently played a part in combining tange (“fight over”) and nage (“tamarind”). 233. Monkeys have their places, ‘o’a ne’e loka. See Fish fry have their pools (No. 471) 234. Monkeys of Oki Deu pull back the foreskin, monkeys of Oki Nage tear at the cloth ‘O’a Oki Deu kési seu kési seu, ‘o’a Oki Nage wisi ‘agi wisi ‘agi People stimulating their genitals or masturbating Literally meaning “to tear a textile,” wisi ‘agi is a metaphor within a metaphor and is understood both here and more generally as “manipulating the genitals.” Kési is “to pull, take off (for example, clothing)” while one meaning of seu is “playing in the dirt” (said of children), but commentators equated kési seu with the apparently more explicit kési lasu, “to pull on the penis.” In this regard, two separate monkey metaphors (Nos. 218, 219) are evidently combined in the present expression, where prosodic considerations have clearly played a role in matching the more euphemistic seu and ‘agi with the proper names Deu and and Nage. Considered extremely coarse, the parallel phrases are sung by groups of men and women addressing one another in sexual banter, thus providing another example of the genre called pata néke. Oki Deu is the name of an ancient village from where branches of clan Deu, now partly settled in the village of Bo’a Wae, claim to derive. Although “Oki Nage” also suggests a place name, where this might be or have been located I was unable to establish, and in the present expression it might be understood as another name for Oki Deu or, alternatively, for the ancient village of Nata Nage. Especially in a view of local history advanced by Deu in Bo’a Wae, the group of the colonially appointed Nage rajas, contextually “Deu” and “Nage” appear virtual synonyms (Forth 2009a), and in the present expression both Nage and Deu may further be understood as referring to the Nage (or central Nage) people as a

156

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 157

whole. Since Oki, as a topographical term, describes a “nook” or “cranny,” in this context it may well be a disguised reference to human genitalia. 235. Red monkey, pale bronzeback snake ‘O’a to, gala bha A person who behaves badly This is a general deprecation, although apparently one mostly employed in chastising misbehaving children or young people. Nage interpretations thus included a person who behaves childishly and a child trying to behave like an adult – for example, pretending that she/he knows as much as her/his parents. Accordingly, “red monkey” refers to an immature specimen, one whose face is still red (cf. “red child,” ana to, referring a human baby; see also No. 239). However, some evidence suggests the entire expression might also be understood as referring to oddities or abnormalities more generally. Gala bha means “white or light-coloured gala snake” (the Bronzeback Dendrelaphis pictus),” possibly a reference to albino specimens, which some Nage report having seen, or, in the view of two commentators, to relatively pale, immature snakes that become darker with age. In another context (see No. 421) the same phrase may allude to the lighter underside of the snake. On the other hand, the composition of the entire expression suggests prosodic factors, especially when it is considered that in other dialects, ‘o’a to becomes ro’a toro. In regard to adults whose talk suggests immaturity, the metaphor may imply that, like children, such people lack the understanding or experience of adults, so that one should therefore pay them no heed. However, the expression can be used to disparage anyone who incites anger or of whose character or behaviour one disapproves. By the same token, “having a face like a red monkey” (ngia bhia ko’o ‘o’a to) is a more elaborate form of “face of a monkey” (No. 211), another common pejorative. 236. Réndu monkey ‘O’a ‘Édu (dialectal Ro’a Rédu) A skilled climber In central Nage, men of the Réndu (or Rédu) district to the northeast – pronounced ‘Édu in central Nage – have a reputation as skilled climbers. A

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

157

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 158

variant of the metaphor is kebhi ‘o’a ‘Édu, “to adhere, cling onto (a tree) like a Réndu monkey.” 237. Sentinel monkey Ana mono A human spy, scout, or sentinel The term denotes a small monkey that keeps watch from a tree top when other members of the troop enter a field to raid crops. Should humans or dogs approach, the little sentinel sounds the alarm (Forth 2016, 129). Applied to humans, ana mono refers, for example, to a youngster sent to listen in on a meeting or discussion or to attend some other activity, to learn what is said or what transpires. Children (who must of course be old enough to understand the task) are chosen because they can appear to be playing or simply hanging about and therefore, unlike an adult, will likely go unnoticed. The term can also refer to a man who climbs a tree or takes up another elevated position to observe an enemy’s advance. Mono is apparently related to moni, “to watch, observe”; ana is “child” and “person, member (of a collectivity).” 238. Struck by the monkey disease Ta’a gena ‘u’u ‘o’a A person who is visibly startled or nervous or who cannot keep still “Monkey disease” (‘u’u ‘o’a) could more exactly be translated as “spell of the monkey.” Defying any simple gloss, u’u (dialectal ru’u) refers to an illness or physical condition thought to result from a breach of a taboo on stealing, imposed by an owner, mostly of fruit-bearing trees. The operation of the taboo is indicated by a particular icon usually suspended from the tree. Reflecting a set of mystical ideas known throughout Flores (and also on the neighbouring island of Sumba; Forth 1981, 102, 115–16), there are numerous kinds of ‘u’u, and some are named after animals. Someone “struck by the monkey disease” exhibits symptoms reminiscent of the restive, jittery movements of a macaque. As a metaphor, however, the expression refers not to a person actually diagnosed with the illness but to someone who behaves in a way similar to someone so afflicted.

158

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 159

239. Unmoulded monkey ‘O’a mona kewe A person with an unattractive, ill-formed, or odd-looking face The metaphor was described as reflecting both the human-like appearance of infant monkeys and the linked notion that monkey mothers manipulate the faces of their newborns so that, with time, they will grow to look like other monkeys. Although recorded more than once, the metaphor seems not to be widely known and the expression – and perhaps even the belief about monkey practice – could conceivably reflect a misinterpretation of ‘o’a mona kebhi (“a monkey that does not cling to trees,” No. 228). 240. Monkey’s testicles Lase ‘o’a A kind of tree The tree is thus named as the fruit are thought to resemble a monkey’s testicles. Related to Nage lasu (penis), lase is a dialectal term used to the northwest of central Nage and in Ngadha. Comparative Remarks on Mammal Metaphors As is obvious from this and the preceding chapter, some mammals provide vehicles for more metaphors than do others. In fact, 63 percent of mammal metaphors (151 of 240) are accounted for by just five categories. All occurring in at least twenty expressions, these are “buffalo,” “horse,” “dog,” “pig,” and “monkey.” Full figures are set out in table 1. As the table makes clear, domestic (or mostly domestic) mammals provide proportionally more metaphors than do wild kinds. The apparent importance of domesticity is further borne out by the domestic fowl, or “chicken,” which, as is seen in the next chapter, occurs in forty-four metaphors – more than any kind of wild bird and more than any kind of mammal. At the same time, domesticity alone cannot explain metaphorical prominence, as shown by the monkey, which appears in thirtytwo metaphors and is surpassed only by the water buffalo and the dog. Clearly, then, other factors are involved, including, in varying combinations, a more general familiarity (deriving from frequency of observation and

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

159

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 160

Table 1 Totals of metaphors involving different mammals Mainly domestic mammals

Total domestic: 162

Water buffalo

33

Horse

26

Cattle

2

Sheep

6

Goat

16

Dog

35

Pig (domestic and wild)

25

Cat (domestic and wild)

19

Wild mammals

Total wild: 78

Deer

8

Porcupine

5

Giant rat

4

(Smaller) Rat or mouse Shrew Civet Monkey

17 4 8 32

interaction), size, and possible cultural factors. For example, the greater metaphoric value of domestic over wild animals obviously coincides with the greater economic value of the former for Nage. But these are matters better left until later, where they are explored with reference to all animal metaphors (see chapter 8).

160

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 161

5 Talking with Birds

Birds occupy a special place in the symbolic thought of many peoples, including spiritual beliefs, myth, and augury (see Forth 2017a, regarding the etymology of “augury” and “auspice”), and anthropologists may particularly recall the prominence of avifauna in Australian systems of totemism, signalled in Radcliffe-Brown’s (1951, 114) question of “Why all these birds?” It may not be surprising, therefore, that among Nage animal metaphors, only usages employing mammals outnumber those employing birds. Some attention was given to Nage bird metaphors in an earlier work (Forth 2004a, 140–7, 180–96), but by no means were all metaphors incorporating birds treated there, so the present book provides a far more comprehensive treatment of the topic and, moreover, locates Nage usages involving birds within the wider context of animal metaphors generally. Of seventy-two named bird categories that hypothetically could be used as metaphors, forty-nine, thus a good majority, are in fact so used, while twenty-three are not. What may distinguish these “non-metaphorical” birds is discussed at the end of this chapter. Below, English translations of Nage bird categories are listed alphabetically, as are individual metaphors where there is more than one of these. In several cases, the English gloss is a simple form of the name (e.g., “bushchat”) followed by a more specific identification (Pied bushchat). On the whole, it has not proved necessary to provide introductory remarks as was done with individual mammal categories. Where issues of identification, specific features of a bird, or Nage ideas about the species are relevant to its metaphorical uses, these are mentioned in one or more of the individual commentaries, and mostly in the first.

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 162

Of the forty-nine bird categories Nage employ metaphorically, forty-six are folk-generics (e.g., kolo, dove) while just three are folk-specifics (e.g. kolo dasi, Rock dove or pigeon, No. 391), but none refers simply to “bird” – as in English “free as a bird” or “early bird.” This is mostly attributable to the complex character of the Nage word for “bird,” ana wa ta’a co’o, literally “flying animal.” A qualification concerns peti, or ana peti (see Nos. 327–30), whose most specific referent is small finches but which can also refer contextually to a larger grouping of passerine birds and sometimes approaches the sense of “bird in general” (Forth 2016, 165–6). But even in this case the metaphors can be understood as having a more specific kind of bird as their vehicle. For Nage, birds include bats, and, by virtue of the alphabetical listing, it is bats that begin this review of individual bird metaphors.

BATS • MÉTE 241. Flying fox Méte A youngster who frequently vomits Méte denotes large fruit bats of the genera Pteropus and Dobsonia. Although the name can be used for “bats in general,” thus as a folk-intermediate incorporating other named bat categories, in the present metaphor and others incorporating the name, méte evidently refers specifically to flying foxes and, thus, to a particular folk-generic. Also expressed as “eating like a flying fox” (ka bhia ko’o méte), the present metaphor draws on the idea that flying foxes lack an anus, are unable to defecate, and so must expel food waste by vomiting (Forth 2004a, 123–4). According to another interpretation, a child who is “like a flying fox” eats and defecates continually, or defecates immediately after eating, or even at the same time. This of course would appear to contradict the belief about the bats lacking an anus, as would a more recently recorded idea (encountered in 2016) that flying foxes can eat and defecate simultaneously (see also “bat droppings”). Nevertheless, both applications of the metaphor reflect the fact that bats remain suspended upside down and largely motionless during daylight.

162

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 163

242. Flying fox droppings Ta’i méte Something that is spilled or scattered on the ground; a person who spills or scatters things Usually expressed as a simile, the phrase apparently refers more to objects than people and in this respect differs from formally similar usages like “buffalo dung” (No. 6) and “goat droppings” (No. 70). The expression is also curious in relation to the previously mentioned idea that flying foxes lack an anus and thus vomit up excess food. However, in this context at least, ta’i could be understood not as a specific reference to faeces but in the more general sense of “waste.” 243. Flying fox hair Fu méte Fine hair at the back of a person’s neck This is yet another term describing a part of an animal’s body applied to a part of the human body. 244. Flying fox’s elbow Ciku méte A man who is sturdy, firm and solidly built, and tough Since in Nage the possessive is implied when a nominative follows a personal name or pronoun, the expression can also mean “having the elbow of a flying fox.” It thus refers to an individual physical feature and, unlike “flying fox hair” (No. 243), not to part of the human body in general. 245. Living like a flying fox Muzi bhia ko’o méte A person who is shiftless and lacks energy; someone who likes to stay out or travel or is otherwise active at night and who sleeps during the day Given the habits of bats, the metaphor is self-explanatory. Because bats, as it were, invert day and night, as well as rest in an inverted position (with their heads below and feet above), one might well expect the present metaphor to

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

163

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 164

refer to people suspected of being witches, who are reputed to travel at night and sleep during daylight. As explained elsewhere (Forth 2009b), however, Nage deny any association of bats with witches. With reference to people who simply stay out late – or “night owls” in the English idiom – I was told that, for méte (flying fox), one might substitute gébu or ‘ighu, the names of two smaller kinds of bats. 246. Leaf-nosed bat Bo dinga A person with flared nostrils or an animal, especially a buffalo, with the same feature As a reference to a category of bats, bo dinga is a highly marginal taxon, excluded from the usual Nage tripartite classification of bats (as méte, gébu, and ‘ighu). It is, however, sometimes described as a “kind of ” ‘ighu (see No. 247), and since few people are familiar with its animal referent, it could be described as a dead metaphor. Nage employ the term mostly in friendly banter, for example when referring to men whose nostrils flare when they inhale tobacco smoke. Bo means “snout.” In the Keo region, to the south of Nage, Leafnosed bats (Hipposideridae) are similarly called iru ndinga (iru is “nose,” cognate with central Nage izu). A buffalo with flared nostrils is called bhada bo dinga. 247. Eyes of a tiny bat Ana mata (or lie mata) ‘ighu A person with small, narrow, or half-closed eyes or someone who does not see clearly ‘Ighu names several species of very small bats (Microchiroptera). Also applicable to people who, from tiredness, cannot keep their eyes open, in one sense the expression recalls English “blind as a bat.” 248. Tiny bat ‘Ighu A person who quickly changes course or otherwise acts in an irregular manner

164

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 165

The metaphor is motivated by the rapid and irregular flight of tiny bats, readily observable each evening around twilight. As discussed elsewhere, ‘ighu very occasionally enter dwellings, and such a bat alighting inside a house is considered highly inauspicious (Forth 2007a). 249. Cricket [and] tiny bat, Cico méca. See No. 497 250. Flying fox jackfruit Mo méte A small tree The plant is not a jackfruit but a similar tree, apparently the cempadak (Artocarpus integer). According to Nage, the tree may be so named because flying foxes can eat the relatively small and thin-skinned fruit whereas they cannot eat much larger jackfruit.

BUSHCHAT Pied bushchat • Saxicola pracata • TUTE PÉLA 251. Bushchat seaward on top of a stone Ana tute lau tolo watu An unmarried pregnant woman Lyrics of a song, the metaphor is one of several where small birds represent human females. A small passerine bird, the Pied bushchat is most commonly encountered in central Nage in lower-lying areas to the north of the main area of habitation, as is consistent with the specification of its location as “seaward” (lau). Also located in this region are a hill named Wolo Tute (“bushchat hill”) and the settlement named Mala Tute (“bushchat plain”), the successor to a former hamlet simply named Tute. What has motivated the selection of this particular bird for the present metaphor is not obvious from its form or habits, and Nage interpretations revealed no consensus. But it is nonetheless interesting that the second component of the bushchat’s complete name, péla, can refer to sexual transgression (Forth 2004a, 22, 101, 214n6), more fully designated as sala péla (sala, “error, mistake”).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

165

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 166

252. Bushchat chirps Tute ci cea A time of day As Nage remark, the bushchat calls before sunrise or very early in the morning, even before the friarbird (see Nos. 347–50). Used as a proverb rather than simply as a reference to a time of day, a more elaborate version of the metaphor is “bushchat cries ci cea (expressing) a desire for daylight” (tute ci cea ola mo da).

BUSHLARK Australasian bushlark • Mirafra javanica or a pipit Anthus spp. • ANA GO 253. Legs like a bushlark Taga bhia ko’o ana go Someone with very thin, spindly legs The phrase is especially applied to young children but is also used in banter among adults. Bushlarks and pipits are small birds with thin legs; they also characteristically run along the ground, thus possibly drawing attention to the legs and fixing these as part of the metaphorical vehicle. In English metaphor, a person with skinny legs is similarly described as “sparrowlegged” (Palmatier 1995, 361) or, less specifically, as having “bird legs” (28–9). 254. Pipit (or bushlark) strikes the gong Ana go dhégo go Sound of thunder A lyric from a planting song, the expression is metaphorically equivalent to ana ja paka laba (No. 59), with which it can be conjoined. By all indications, the appearance of ana go in this context is not motivated by physical features of the bird but purely by the homonymy of go (“gong”) and an unexplained part of the bird’s name, as well as their prosodic effect when combined with dhégo.

166

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 167

CHANNEL-BILLED CUCKOO • Scythrops novaehollandiae • MUTA ME 255. Channel-billed cuckoo Muta me A shiftless person dependent on others for food The metaphor can more specifically refer to someone who gives orders to others but does no work himself; thus one woman used it to describe a shiftless husband who orders his wife about. Motivating the metaphor is the parasitic habit of the Channel-billed cuckoo, which lays its eggs in crows’ nests. Such parasitism, however, is not completely understood by Nage, who claim that young cuckoos as well as young crows hatch from eggs laid by crows and are accordingly fed by crows. Where muta me refers to people who instruct others but are themselves idle, the metaphor would appear further motivated by the cuckoo’s significance as a chronological sign, indicating the time when people must begin working their fields, and thus its characterization as the “great foreman” (see No. 258), a value advertised in all other metaphors that incorporate this bird. 256. Channel-billed cuckoo, you shout a great deal but your throat is sore in vain Muta me, kau ta’a ‘éghe ‘éghe foko o héde A person whose efforts or contributions are not recognized or rewarded Occurring as a lyric of a planting song, the expression refers to the cuckoo’s calling early in the wet season, indicating the time people should be preparing their fields for planting. Despite this useful service, however, the cuckoo does not later benefit from human cultivation as it does not eat maize or other wet season crops – thus the parallel with people who expend much effort in some task but are not rewarded for their efforts. In the planting song, the Channel-billed cuckoo is paired with the koel (see also No. 259), another parasitic cuckoo that calls early in the rainy season, while both birds are contrasted to cockatoos and crows (Nos. 305, 307).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

167

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 168

257. Channel-billed cuckoo, you speak well Muta me kau ta’a sezu pawe Someone who provides useful information This too is a lyric in a planting song that recognizes the importance of the cuckoo’s call for the organization of agricultural tasks. Although the metaphorical gloss may risk over-interpretation, the cuckoo is nevertheless represented here as an agent that “speaks” in a timely manner, providing good news (sezu pawe). Sezu, translated as “speak,” refers to vocalization in humans as well as birds and a variety of other animals, while the calling of birds is more specifically designated as polu (“to call, cry”). 258. Cuckoo above takes charge, moves (others) to action Muta me zéle kéku A person who takes the lead in some activity, especially one from which he/she him/herself will not necessarily benefit Zéle, “above, higher up,” specifices the Channel-billed cuckoo’s call as usually being heard overhead, while the bird is in flight. As noted earlier, the cuckoo’s cry in effect summons people to work in the fields, and for this reason Nage also name the bird the “great foreman” (mado méze), a metaphor that, it is worth noting, has a human as its vehicle and an animal as its referent. 259. The Channel-billed cuckoo has already cried out, the koel has already called Muta me négha ‘éghe, tou ou négha polu The time of the year by which people should be ready for planting Lyrics from a planting song, the parallel expressions again refer to the significance of birds as chronological signs. Like the Channel-billed cuckoo, the koel, another species of cuckoo, vocalizes just before the beginning of the rainy season and the time, usually in mid- to late October, when cultivators should be ready for planting. The song as a whole derides lazy people who do not have their plots ready at this time. In the parallelism, conjoining the names of the two birds with two roughly synonymous verbs reflects not only the similar behaviours of the two cuckoos, but also prosodic effects, especially

168

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 169

in regard to the assonance of ou (the second part of the koel’s onomatopoeic name) and polu (“to call, cry out”) and the alliteration produced by négha (“already,” indicating completed action) and ‘éghe (“to call out, shout”).

CHICKENS, DOMESTIC FOWL • Gallus gallus • MANU The many chicken metaphors reflect a generally close relationship between these birds and humans connected with the former’s status as the main, and traditionally the only, avian domesticate. Fowls are regularly employed as sacrifices, in which context their entrails are inspected as auguries revealing the will of deceased relatives, ancestors, and other spiritual beings. And chickens are always included as part of bridewealth and other goods given by wifetakers (collectively designated as tua manu nio, “toddy, chickens, [and] coconuts”), a practice reflected in several metaphors in which the birds are identified either with wife-takers themselves, married women, or unmarried females destined to become members of wife-taking groups. As this should suggest, to call people “chickens” in Nage has a quite different and rather more positive ring than it does in English, in which “chicken” is, among other things, a slighting reference to a coward. For this reason, I thought of employing the more technical “domestic fowl” in translating individual Nage metaphors, which also gets around the absence from English of a general term for the bird that is not age specific (and perhaps not gendered since “chicken” can specify the female bird and is moreover used in English metaphorically for a woman or young girl). In the end, however, I decided to retain “chicken,” as this is now widely employed colloquially for the species as a whole. 260. A brood of chickens attracts chickens, Moko manu moko pani manu. See A flock of cockatoos attracts cockatoos (No. 304) 261. Black hen (as) mother, red cock (as) father Ine susu mite, ame lalu to Two parties (individuals or groups) who trace descent from the same ancestor or ancestral couple

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

169

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 170

Figure 18 Tethered cock with owner (No. 260)

Although Nage employ susu and lalu for females and males of a variety of non-mammals, in this context the terms are understood as referring specifically to domestic fowls. The expression concerns sharing of common and often quite distant origin, and in both phrases the colour terms connote great age. Paralleling susu and lalu, the terms for human parents reflect the standard binary composite ine ame (“mother [and] father”), denoting not only parents but also ancestors of both sexes (cf. ebu, “grandparent, ancestor,” where sex is not distinguished). It is also noteworthy that in both ine ame and susu lalu, the female term always comes first.

170

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 171

262. Chicken that pulls on (another’s) tail Manu ta’a edo bhédo A person who detains or holds another person back Bhédo, here translated as “tail,” refers more exactly to the pygostyle, the fleshy protuberance located at the end of a bird’s caudal vertebrae and known colloquially as the “parson’s nose.” The metaphor is employed, for example, when someone needs to leave the house to go somewhere but is prevented from doing so by the arrival of a guest.1 263. Chicken with a stunted tail Manu we’o pubu A woman with short frizzy hair that cannot be wound into a bun The phrase occurs as part of a teasing song (pata néke), the complete lyrics of which are: “chicken with a stunted tail, up on the roof ridge, preens its wings, hair (or feathers) like millet chaff ” (manu we’o pubu, mena tolo ghubu, sui pau ta’a bele, fu bhia kuta wete). Fu denotes both human hair and the feathers of birds. 264. Chicken with feathered legs Manu taga labu Someone wearing clothes that are too long or large The phrase denotes a fowl with feathers growing down to the feet, evidently a mutation. Labu is “shirt, upper body garment” but may originally have referred more generally to a body covering (cf. the Indonesian cognate kelambu, “mosquito net”). According to Nage, the expression can describe someone wearing clothes on parts of the body, such as the upper torso, where they are more decorative than necessary, or to any sort of clothing, including waistcloths or sarongs, that are too large. But the most common reference is to men who wear Western-style trousers (now worn regularly by most younger men) that are palpably too long. In addition, the assessment can be contextual; for example, people working in fields normally wear their waistcloths hitched up to the knees (to prevent them getting dirty or wet), so that anyone wearing a cloth down to the ankles can be cynically described as a “chicken with feathered legs,” implying that the person is not prepared to work.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

171

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 172

265. Chickens without a coop Manu kodo mona An impoverished family without a house of its own and thus reduced to living with others or in a field hut. A kodo (“coop”) is a portable enclosure of plaited bamboo in which chickens are placed at night and where hens lay and eggs are hatched. As the phrase can apply to people who live permanently in field huts (kéka), “chickens without a coop” can more specifically refer to people who lack a house (sa’o), that is, a dwelling located inside an established village (bo’a). As a proper name, Kodo Mudi denotes the “ancestral” house (sa’o waja) of the clan Mudi in the village of Tiba Kisa (see Forth 2004a, 90, plate 5.1). Kodo also means “pod,” as in kodo mo, “seedpod of jackfruit” (mo), and further refers to a traditional women’s garment, a sort of blouse that covers the breasts. 266. Chickens of god Ana manu déwa Humans in general as beings who will inevitably die Ana manu denotes both “chicks” and “chickens” (in the sense of young fowls). As discussed in chapter 2, the metaphor refers to humans particularly as mortal beings and occurs in songs of mourning in which singers proclaim “we are god’s chickens” (kita ana manu déwa). Déwa (divinity) refers to the being Nage designate more completely as Ga’e Déwa, a creator deity and supreme being nowadays regularly, although not invariably, identified with the god of Christianity and Islam (Forth 1998, 195–216). The succeeding lines of the song speak of this divinity as “coming down to gather (his fowls) together and never letting any escape; counting and never making a mistake” (déwa ko poi mona be’o lozi; déwa ko baca mona be’o sala) – meaning that everyone must eventually die (Forth 2004a, 190). Except for the different animal vehicle, “we are god’s chickens” is virtually identical to the Nuer metaphor translated by Evans-Pritchard (1956, 12) as “we, all of us, have the nature of ants in that we are very tiny in respect to God,” a usage Evans-Pritchard compares to “Isaiah’s likening of men to grasshoppers” (see Isaiah 40:22) – also in relation to the Abrahamic god.

172

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 173

267. Cocks fighting Manu papa ta Two people fighting or engaged in a brawl The phrase can be applied to two men, two women, or a man and a woman (usually a husband and wife). By contrast to many other Indonesian peoples, Nage appear never to have engaged in cock-fighting as a traditional pastime, but cocks will of course fight naturally to establish dominance. Ta is “cockspur” or “to spur, stick with a spur”; papa expresses reciprocal action. 268. Continue giving chickens Dhemu manu Marrying a deceased wife’s sister Dhemu more literally means “to connect.” The phrase complements dhungu tua, “keep the toddy flowing” (dhunga is “to tie, retie, e.g., the two ends of a broken string”) and alludes to a wife-taker’s obligation to provide chickens and palm wine to a wife-giver (cf. No. 276). By marrying the sister (or similarly close female relative) of a deceased wife, a man thus continues the relationship with his deceased wife’s group and more generally the connection of marriage alliance between his group and the group of the wife’s brother. 269. Crowing cocks that answer one another, Manu kako papa walo. See Bleating goats that hear one another (No. 68) 270. Hatch out (chicks) like hens, Mesa bhia manu. See Give birth like pigs (No. 123) 271. Hen gathering chicks under her wing Manu wodo ‘eko A husband who gains paternity of a child fathered by another man The phrase is often expressed simply as wodo ‘eko and refers to the man’s actions as much as the man himself. Meaning “to gather together” wodo has the further sense of “to protect”; ‘eko is contextually synonymous. As Nage

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

173

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 174

recognize, the expression describes a mother hen sheltering chicks under her wing and might therefore suggest a woman who is pregnant with a child. Yet the phrase is invariably applied to a man, more specifically a man who marries a woman who is carrying the child of another man, often a man who has previously engaged her as a “mistress” (ana bu’e). In this situation people still recognize the paternity of the biological father while accepting the woman’s husband’s claim to the child as a fait accompli, especially as it is he who will have paid bridewealth for the woman before the birth and usually before the pregnancy is even apparent. Activities of hens and chicks inform the English metaphors “mother hen” (someone who is overly protective) and “taking (someone) under one’s wing,” both used for men as well as women, and thus demonstrating that in English as in Nage hen metaphors need not denote only female humans. (Other examples are listed below.) 272. Hen that lays eggs in another hen’s nest Manu telo ‘oghe A person who disturbs, trespasses against others; someone who unnecessarily duplicates the actions of another Although applied more generally, especially in the first sense, the phrase refers to a man who “cuckolds” another, in which respect it is worth recalling that the English word refers to the parasitic habit of birds of a different sort, the cuckoos. 273. Hen that lays eggs in various places Manu telo loa A person who freely engages in illicit relationships Telo is both “egg” and “to lay (eggs),” while loa means “overflowing, excessive, beyond bounds” – here alluding not to the number of eggs but to the variety of places in which eggs are laid. The metaphor can refer to a woman who consorts with and has children by several men or a man who maintains several mistresses simultaneously. It also recalls the general theme, expressed in several mammal metaphors (e.g., No. 71), whereby illicit sexual relationships are depicted as being prosecuted outside of human habitations. As Nage remark, sometimes hens, even when provided with a coop (kodo), will lays eggs in several places – on one day in one spot and on another day in another

174

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 175

spot. Such hens can lay in forest, rock crevices, and occasionally also in a coop, but not consistently in any single place. I first recorded the metaphor, in the same meaning, as manu telo ghoa, “hen that lays eggs like a monitor lizard,” but this is apparently a misinterpretation (or “folk etymology”) of the present expression. Nevertheless, a man who employed this version remarked how female monitors (ghoa) lay their eggs in the forest as disorderly hens will sometimes do, and it may also be significant that one of the monitor metaphors (No. 445) has much the same meaning. 274. Hen that jumps (moves) from coop to coop Manu kadi kodo People who do not (yet) have a house of their own and so stay temporarily with a number of others The metaphor reflects the same identification of chicken coops with houses expressed in No. 265. The expression may also apply to someone who has a house but nevertheless frequently stays with other people. 275. Hen’s egg Telo manu The human calf This can be classified as another term denoting a “part” of an animal employed as the exclusive term for a part of the human body. In English, the “calf ” is similarly designated by an animal name, but whether the anatomical application ultimately reflects an animal metaphor, perhaps through Old Norse, is uncertain. 276. Lost fowl Manu mele A deceased married woman Complementing “palm wine (toddy) that has disappeared” (tua pota), the combined phrases refer to goods owed to a woman’s brother at her death by her surviving husband or sons. As both chickens and toddy are among the goods wife-takers, including in-married women, are obliged to bring

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

175

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 176

whenever they visit wife-givers, the expression involves metonymy since Nage consider a married woman as having become a member of a wifetaking group and no longer belonging to her natal group. For the same reason, “lost chicken” can be more generally interpreted as an allusion to any deceased wife-taker. Nage regard the death of either a married woman or her husband as a potential breach in a relation of affinal alliance that must be repaired or given recognition by the obligatory mortuary payment also called manu mele (Forth 2009c). As noted previously (chapter 2, note 4), representing wife-takers as chickens recalls the identification of humans in general as “chickens of god” (No. 266). 277. Mouth like a chicken’s anus Mumu bhia bui manu Someone who talks incessantly According to Nage a fowl’s anus continuously moves inward and outward. As the expression applies especially to someone whose constant talking covers all topics and accordingly maintains no confidences, it closely resembles a shrew metaphor (No. 198). 278. Our chickens cluster together, other people’s chickens fly away Manu kita wodo pida, manu ata co léla People will (or should) keep their own affairs to themselves (since) outsiders who learn of them will advertise them far and wide This is a proverb advising people to keep private matters private. Referring to a hen gathering chicks under her wing, wodo is explained earlier (No. 271). Although meaning “to fly” in other Florenese languages, here léla apparently means “across” or “to cross (a boundary).” 279. Red cock (as) father, Ame lalu to. See Black hen (as) mother (No. 261) 280. Sea fowl cries pitying itself (or mourning its body) Ana manu mesi polu kasi weki The soul of a recently deceased person

176

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 177

Nage explain the phrase as reflecting an analogy between a human life and a seabird that, unusually, wanders far inland but must inevitably return to the sea. In the same way, “a person’s earthly sojourn is limited: a human must eventually die, and the soul must return to its place of origin, which is divinity” (Forth 2004a, 89). The expression is thus comparable to “chickens of divinity” (No. 266), and just as Nage do not conceive of human souls as actually taking the form of chickens, so they do not consider them ever being embodied as sea birds. In other words, the usage does not reflect any specific belief about souls; rather, the identification of the soul, or a person, with such a bird “appears to derive entirely from [this] particular poetic idiom” (ibid.) – a song of lament in which it can complement ana kolo dasi (No. 391; see also Forth 2004a, 190). On the other hand, one of several places to where Nage say deceased souls proceed after death is indeed the sea. Although in related languages the term specifically denotes either large waders or sandpipers and similar small shorebirds, central Nage “sea fowl” (manu mesi) refers to any sort of vagrant sea bird unusually encountered far inland, and it does not name any particular kind of bird, even less any kind of chicken (manu). As a term occurring specifically in a mortuary context, it may be relevant that mesi, “sea,” recalls mesu “(to feel, express) pity.” Though ana can mean “child, immature specimen” (see ana manu, “chick”), in the present phrase it appears to describe a member of a collectivity and so has an individualizing effect (Forth 2016, 54–6) – as it does in a number of other bird metaphors. 281. Speckled fowl, mottled (or dappled) horse; spotted cat, drawn circles Manu ke’o ja kéla, meo déto uki léke Occupants of a territory of mixed composition Such a territory is divided into fields with diverse owners, in contrast to an area continuously owned by people of a single clan or village. Among the phrases complementing “speckled fowl” only uki léke is not an animal metaphor, denoting instead circles drawn on the ground into which pits of the fruit of a giant liana (léke) are tossed in a traditional game. The entire metaphor draws on the similarity between, on the one hand, the variegated patterns characteristic of all these things – in the first instance the plumage of a

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

177

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 178

bird (see figure 19) and in the second and third the pelage of mammals – and the diverse affiliation of parties holding rights to different parcels of land within a single area. Manu ke’o (“speckled fowl”) also refers to a supernatural being (see No. 297), but this sense has no relevance in the present context. Although the English term is not an animal metaphor, the Nage usage may nevertheless recall English “motley.” Historically associated with the parti-coloured costume of a jester, in the metaphor “motley crew,” “motley” describes something “of a varied character” or “incongruously varied in appearance or character,” while “motley” as a noun denotes “an incongruous mixture” (Oxford English Reference Dictionary). Although the ultimate source is unclear, the English word may be a form of “mote,” meaning a speck or spot. And also worth noting is “mottle,” which the same dictionary describes as probably a back form of “motley” and defines as “an irregular arrangement of spots or patches” and, verbally, as “mark with spots or smears of colour,” thus “mottled.” 282. Stripping (skin off) a chicken’s leg Kou kuku manu Doing something without reward, or getting a disappointing result Although Nage offered a variety of interpretations for this metaphor, the general sense is doing something in vain or without result or return. Everyone with whom I discussed the usage recognized its derivation from the fact that, when one strips a fowl’s leg (the lower, featherless part, not to be confused with the “drumstick”), one finds only bone and no meat beneath the skin. The expression itself is curious because kuku denotes the hoof of an ungulate and, by extension, the limbs of an ungulate carcass. As Nage themselves recognize, therefore, chickens (manu) strictly speaking do not have kuku; hence kuku manu can itself be understood as metaphorical. Recorded applications included: a person who appears capable but whose performance eventually proves disappointing; someone who is usurped by another and receives no part of an inheritance; and someone who contributes to bridewealth payments but receives no portion of the wife-giver’s counter-gift in return. In all cases the metaphor can be used in self-reference; thus a person can say “I (we) have stripped skin off a chicken’s leg” (nga’o [kami] kou kuku manu), indicating that nothing, or very little, has been obtained in a situation in which some return could reasonably have been expected.

178

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 179

Figure 19 Male speckled fowl (No. 281)

Although obviously not identical, the Nage metaphor may recall English “hen’s teeth,” part of a fowl that, like a “chicken’s hoof,” does not exist and that denotes something so scarce as to be virtually non-existent. Regarding the referent it may be additionally reminiscent of “flogging a dead horse,” meaning doing something that cannot possibly be effective. 283. “You” fowl Manu miu Someone who makes serious accusations against or is unduly critical of others

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

179

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 180

Manu miu refers to a nocturnal sound resembling “miu, miu,” which Nage interpret as a manifestation of a witch (see No. 296). However, miu is also the second person plural (“you”), so that describing someone as “like a ‘you’ fowl” means that she or he is inclined to accuse people of wrong-doing – and possibly even of being a witch. Qualifying the inclusion of this usage as a chicken metaphor is a common Nage denial that manu miu refers to any kind of bird, claiming that nocturnal “miu” sounds can equally be made by other creatures, including horses. In another view, the name may denote a bird, but of no particular kind or of a kind unknown. More certainly, it does not name any kind of chicken, and whatever its precise referent the category seems most closely comparable to “highland quail” (No. 397), another term metaphorically incorporating a bird name and similarly referring to an ominous nocturnal sound. One man interpreted manu miu as a reference to a woman who squeals at a man’s advances. Although this interpretation may be idiosyncratic, it nevertheless agrees with the use of “chicken” as a metaphor for women in other expressions. 284. Young cock Manu kako bake An adolescent male whose voice is breaking The term also denotes a growth stage in domestic fowls, when young cockerels begin to crow (kako) but are not yet able to do so with full volume or vigour. As a reference to a young person, it may recall English “spring chicken,” though this can refer to young people of either sex (and perhaps especially a woman). Sometimes used to mean “lacking fluency” (in a language), bake has the more general sense of “unproficient,” “(still) unable to perform a task well.” 285. Young hen Manu moka A woman requested in marriage A metaphor used in marriage negotiations, “to request a woman in marriage” is usually expressed as pai manu moka. Equivalent phrases include pai ipi

180

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 181

bola, “request a woman’s container for betel and areca nut,” and pai wini ngani, “request seed for planting.” In the context of everyday activities, all these items are associated with women and can therefore be understood as metonyms, as women are largely charged with both the care of poultry and planting fields. As noted elsewhere, chickens are also among the animals Nage employ as bridewealth, and while they are therefore not transferred with brides (unlike pigs), once incorporated into this group a woman becomes a wife-taker and then is responsible for raising chickens to give to her natal group and other wife-givers of her husband’s family. In regard to mammals as well, the qualifier moka specifies a mature female animal that has yet to give birth. 286. Young hen or young cock? Moka ko lalu? A girl or a boy? This is a conventional question used when enquiring after the sex of a newborn child. As in other idioms combining the two genders – for example, ine ame, “mother [and] father, parents” – the female term is normally given first. Nage apply lalu to male specimens of all non-mammals, and moka to young females of a variety of animals, but in the present metaphor the terms are invariably understood as referring to domestic fowls. 287. Chicken leech Mate manu A small kind of leech, a terrestrial leech (smaller than “buffalo leech,” a larger, aquatic leech) This is one of three animal names employing “chicken” to distinguish a kind smaller than contrasting kinds. The other two are given immediately below. A comparable use of English “chicken” to specify things that are “small or trivial” has been noted by Ammer (1989, 32–3), who records “chicken lobster” for a lobster weighing less than a pound; “chicken pox,” which she describes as “a mild disease compared to the smallpox it once was thought to resemble”; and “chicken weed (fifteenth century) or chickweed,” for “a tiny wildflower, only a few inches high.” Ammer further observes how “in the 1830s in America

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

181

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 182

chicken feed meant small change, or a small amount of money, stemming from the fact that chickens can be fed corn and wheat grains too small for other uses,” adding that “the less polite chicken shit originated during World War II in complaint against petty, disagreeable military rules.” In current English, this last term is still used to refer to something of little value, pathetically small, or of poor quality (see also “chicken-feed”). 288. Chicken monitor Ghoa manu Small monitor lizard Probably referring to immature specimens, the term denotes a putative kind of Water monitor (Varanus salvator) contrasting to a larger kind named ghoa ba’o (unanalyzable). 289. Chicken viper Hiku manu Small pit viper The referent is a putative kind of Island pit viper (Cryptelytrops insularis) contrasting to a larger kind, but, as in the previous metaphor, the creatures in question are by all indications merely young pit vipers. 290. Chicken ginger Lea manu A kind of ginger (Zinziber sp.) Referring to the smallest sort of ginger, “chicken” is used here in the same way as in the three animal names above (Nos. 287–9). 291. Chicken’s claw thorn Ga kungu manu A thorny plant Possibly a cactus (and in that case imported by Europeans in or after the sixteenth century), the plant is so named because the thorns resemble the talons of a domestic fowl.

182

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 183

292. Cock, male fowl Manu lalu A kind of tree The wood of the tree is used as building material. No one I asked could suggest why the tree is so named. Verheijen (1990) lists the same name in Ngadha as referring, in different dialects, to Enicostemma axillaris or Cyperacus pilotus. 293. Chicken herb Fau manu A kind of plant Commonly found growing near villages, the round leaves of this unidentified plant are pounded, mixed with salt, and given to both chickens and larger livestock to treat intestinal worms, and can also be placed on wounds. Nage do not apply fau to any other plant, and I was unable to obtain further clarification of the name. 294. Chicken rattan Ua manu A small kind of rattan Small and with thin stems, Nage contrast this rattan to a larger sort named ua méze (“big rattan”), thus providing a further instance of manu as a reference to a small kind of plant or animal. In reference to animals, ua also means “innards, entrails,” so the plant name is a homonym of ua manu, “chicken entrails,” the component of sacrificial fowls Nage use as an augury. A somewhat different sense of ua occurs in ua koka (No. 345). For Ngadha, Verheijen (1990) provisionally identifies the rattan as Daemonorops sp. 295. Chicken’s tongue Lema manu A sort of grass A plant that is plentiful only in the rainy season, Nage describe the leaves as resembling a chicken’s tongue. Verheijen (1990) lists lema manu in Lio as the name of Hedyotis corymbosa.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

183

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 184

296. Miu fowl Manu miu A nocturnal sound As noted earlier, although incorporating manu (chicken) the name does not denote any sort of bird or other animal but primarily refers to a mysterious and ominous sound. Also, while Nage associate the sound with a witch out to cause harm, it does not designate any clearly conceived category of spiritual beings. Mistaking the sound for a human voice calling miu, the second person plural, people might be inclined to respond “who are you?,” but were anyone to do so, the speaker and his family would then be cursed (Forth 2004a, 83–4). The metaphorical application of manu miu to a person is described above (No. 283). Interestingly, in Lio ule miu (ule, “bird, creature”) does indeed appear to name a particular bird, possibly the hawk-owl Ninox scutulata, and one that, moreover, is credited with making the same inauspicious sounds Nage attribute to manu miu. 297. Speckled fowl Manu ke’o A spiritual being Illuminating its name, the being is described as a large snake with a cock’s head, and in this and other respects is largely comparable to another supernatural creature called naga. Details are discussed in Forth (1998, 88–98). 298. Chicken (young fowl, chick) Ana manu Larger sacrificial animal (especially a water buffalo) This usage was recorded in Forth (2004a, 90), where I also mentioned kodo (coop) as a figurative reference to kopo, an enclosure in which buffalo are kept. The opposite of hyperbole – illustrated in the context of sacrifice by the Nuer practice of designating a cucumber as an ox as well as by Nage “trough buffalo,” denoting a pig (No. 32) – calling a large animal a chicken is a conventional understatement.

184

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 185

Since Nage regularly pair tua, “palm wine (or gin),” with manu when speaking of bridewealth or other goods regularly given by wife-takers to wifegivers, a parallel idiom is the metaphorical use of “palm wine” (tua or tua ae; ae is “liquid”) to refer to the entirety of bridewealth goods, as in “we wish to bring you palm wine” (kita mo edi miu tua), an expression employed by the groom’s group when negotiating a marriage. As noted, the principal bridewealth valuables are in fact large livestock and, more specifically, water buffalo – hence, like “chicken,” this too is a conventional understatement. Just once I recorded bhada manu, “chicken buffalo”; however, this refers not to a buffalo but to a chicken slaughtered in place thereof, and so is comparable to “trough buffalo.” 299. Sick chicken Manu béwe Insufficient bridewealth, a very small amount of bridewealth Complemented by “palm wine that has gone bad” (tua senge), the phrase can be used to understate or trivialize an amount of bridewealth given, but it also refers to an amount which, though small, is nevertheless sufficient to establish a marriage and testify to the wife-taker’s good intentions. Like other expressions (Nos. 268, 276, 298) the metaphor draws on chickens and palm wine as invariable components of wife-takers’ gifts. 300. Chicken’s beak Ngi’i manu Growth stage of maize The term applies when maize plants have just emerged above ground to a height of about one centimetre, or the length of a chicken’s beak. 301. Chicken’s thigh Pa’a manu Growth stage of cultivated plants The term refers to shoots that have grown to the height of a chicken’s thigh.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

185

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 186

302. Mother hen hut Kéka manu wodo A small hut with thatch reaching almost to the ground, thus resembling a sitting or a sleeping hen with wings resting on the earth (wodo) As manu wodo more specifically refers to a hen thus disposed with chicks sheltering under her wings (see No. 271), the image further evokes a representation of such a building as a place of protection. Huts in this form can be used as dwellings, in which case Nage describe them as especially secure places to spend the night. However, very small structures of the same form constructed with just two posts rather than four, and erected beside a village house, are used solely as places to store trophy horns of sacrificial water buffalo. 303. Cocks crow Manu kako Times at which cocks crow during the night The more elaborate phrase ana kisa kobe manu kako, “child from the middle of the night (and) the crowing of cocks,” metaphorically refers to a child conceived outside of a recognized marriage and whose paternity is therefore unknown or disputed – or, as one might say, “in the dark.” Nage identify “darkness” with lack of knowledge or mental clarity in a way similar to English and other languages (see, e.g., meze, “dark,” also meaning “in the dark” – i.e., “benighted,” “befuddled”). A longer phrase incorporating “crowing cocks” (manu kako) complements a friarbird metaphor (No. 335), and in this context reveals an identification with humans in general. A comparable usage in which the activity of fowls serves as a chronological sign is “chickens descend (from their roosts)” (manu pozo), referring to the time around 5:30 a.m.

COCKATOO Yellow-crested cockatoo • Cacatua sulphurea • KAKA KEA or KEA 304. A flock of cockatoos attracts cockatoos, the cockatoo flies up (into the sky); a brood of chickens attracts chickens, the chicken wanders off down on the ground

186

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 187

Woe kea woe pani kea, kea co imu wa’a zéta; moko manu moko pani manu, manu loza imu zale awu People typically consort only with people of the same kind Although much reduced since the mid-twentieth century and locally extinct in many places, cockatoos maintain a place in Nage metaphors. In three of the expressions below the birds’ significance lies in their (former) status as invaders of cultivated fields, especially fields of ripening maize. The present expression, a proverb encountered in the lyrics of circle-dance songs, recalls the English proverb “birds of a feather flock together.” Translated here as “attracts,” the verb pani has the further senses of “to bring, carry along,” “to draw,” and “to influence, encourage (others to follow one).” In song, a succeeding line expresses pity for the Brahmany kite, which, according to the Nage interpretation, is all alone and longs for the company of cockatoos and chickens but is unable to join them, partly because they prefer their own company but also because they have all gone away. The cockatoo has flown up into the sky (to join other cockatoos) while the chicken has wandered off (to join other fowls). The metaphors are evidently motivated by the occurrence of both cockatoos and domestic fowl in flocks and, although commentators did not remark on this, by their complementarity as strong flyers and ground-dwelling birds, respectively. 305. Cockatoo and crow are the most fortunate of all (birds) as they remain silent but are the first to get star maize Kasa kasa ko’o ngata kea ne’e ha, ta’a heta pau ko’o ngata ulu mewi holo dala. People who gain benefit from something, even though (unlike others) they have expended no effort and made no contribution Another proverb, the expression comes from a planting song in which the cockatoo and crow (ha) are explicitly contrasted to the Channel-billed cuckoo and Common koel (Nos. 256, 382). The former pair are described as “most fortunate” of all birds because they feast on ripening maize, whereas the cuckoo and the koel receive nothing of the crop, even though their vocalizations, heard early in the wet season, assist cultivators by signalling when people should have fields ready for planting. In contrast, crows and cockatoos are silent when the last two “unfortunate” birds begin calling.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

187

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 188

306. Cockatoo’s wings Bele kea A person who changes his or her mind or is otherwise inconsistent The expression can be applied, for example, to someone who, in regard to a specific matter, says one thing on one occasion and something quite different shortly afterwards; criticizing such a person, Nage might thus say mae bhia bele kea, “do not be like the wings of a cockatoo.” The metaphor draws on the fact that, when gliding or coming into land, cockatoos will tilt one wing upward and the other downward in quick succession. Hence the Nage usage draws on a particular sort of alternating motion in precisely the same way as do metaphorical applications of English “waver” (“shake, quiver”), for example, in reference to human equivocation, vacillation, or unreliability. In the context of traditional pugilistic competitions (etu), Nage employ “cockatoo’s wings” in a more positive sense to describe parrying movements employed to avoid an opponent’s blows. At these competitions, men who dance to the accompaniment of chanting (mélo) imitate the bird’s method of flight with outstretched arms, while one group of chanters sings o bele kea bele kea (“oh cockatoo’s wings, cockatoo’s wings”). This is then answered by a second group of men, occupying the other end of the field, who reply li’o lénga li’o lénga, a phrase also describing a cockatoo’s flight and a similar alternating movement (li’o, “to lie, sleep face upwards”; lénga, “to lie face downwards”). 307. Cockatoos and crows Kaka ha A large gathering of people; people who engage in profligate expenditure Somewhat unusually, in this metaphor the complete form of the cockatoo’s name is abbreviated as kaka. A variant, lea kaka ha, “to discard (things) for cockatoos and crows,” in effect describes leaving food for birds that, through their depredations on cultivated fields, are quite capable of feeding themselves and thus refers to people who expend their resources wastefully, including, in one interpretation, giving food to people who do not need it or who do not reciprocate one’s assistance. Somewhat more positively, the metaphor can allude to conspicuous consumption, describing people wealthy

188

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 189

enough to slaughter large numbers of animals, regardless of cost. Including the reference to a large gathering of people, all applications of the metaphor draw on the habits of both kinds of birds of forming large flocks, descending in large numbers on fields of ripening maize, and consuming maize rapaciously, with many kernels falling to the ground – thus, as it were, being wasted. Although crows as well as cockatoos have virtually disappeared from central Nage, people still remember the phrase wula kaka ha, “month of the cockatoo and crow,” a reference to the time of the year when maize ripens, about late February or early March. 308. Crest of a cockatoo Odu kea Head hair that sticks up in the centre of the head, a person with such hair This is one of several metaphors linking features of particular birds with human head hair, in which respect it should be noted that Nage fu refers both to the hair of humans and mammals and to a bird’s feathers. Although the cockatoo is not the only crested bird known to Nage, the cockatoo’s crest is relatively large and the bird is able to raise and lower it. As the phrase is apparently applied only to men’s head hair, the usage may date from the midtwentieth century, when men began cutting their hair. 309. Scaring off cockatoos, driving away monkeys Ea kéka, oha ‘o’a Repelling (human) invaders As kéka is “cockatoo” in dialects to the northeast, the appearance of this name, in place of kea or kaka, suggests an origin outside central Nage. The phrases describe subordinates, formerly including slaves, charged with guarding a territory against invasion or encroachment by outsiders. Cockatoos and monkeys provide a ready metaphor for human invaders or trespassers because the animals are (or, in the case of cockatoos, were) among the most destructive of crop pests. At the same time, prosody is clearly reflected in matching the animal names with verbs. Ea more exactly means “to shout (in order to drive something away).”

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

189

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 190

COUCAL Lesser coucal • Centropus bengalensis • TOTO 310. Coucal with a rotten anus Toto ‘obo mou A person who claims illness to avoid work The metaphor reflects a Nage belief that the coucal, a large ground-dwelling cuckoo, suffers an anal infestation of worms or maggots (ule) during the wet season but, as it were miraculously, always recovers during the dry season. The wet season is the part of the year that requires most agricultural labour, hence the application of the expression to a malingerer. Nage claim coucals do indeed develop an “infested anus,” which they describe as smelling like diarrhea or a rotting chicken carcass (Forth 2004a, 128). Although the source of the idea is unclear, it could represent an actual infestation of bird parasites. On the other hand, a folktale recorded in Lio (some one hundred kilometres to the east of Nage) in which the coucal is teased by a bird of prey for having a “rotten anus” (as the bird is also in a Nage story, Forth 2017a) was explained as referring to the bird moving its buttocks, like a “wriggling worm,” whenever it vocalizes, thus possibly suggesting another source of the idea. In the Nage story the coucal is taunted for having a “rotten anus” not by another bird but by a monkey. Rather than the metaphor as ordinarily employed by Nage deriving from its use in this tale, however, the mythical episode simply reflects the conventional metaphor.

CROW Large-billed crow • Corvus macrorhynchos • HA Although crows – both the Large-billed crow and the endemic Flores crow (Corvus florensis; Nage héga hea) – are prominent among the birds Nage identify with witches, this association finds no reflection in any crow metaphor. In fact, crows occur in just four metaphorical usages and in two of these they share the focus with another bird, the cockatoo. 311. Cockatoo(s) and crow(s), Kaka ha (or Kaka ne’e ha). See No. 307

190

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 191

312. Crow bat Méte ha A flying fox with dark pelage Nage describe the crow as the blackest of birds. The use of “crow” instead of “black, dark” (mite) in reference to the flying fox’s pelage possibly reflects the Nage classification of both creatures as birds. If so, then the metaphorical (or, more specifically, metonymic) name is partly contingent on folk taxonomy. 313. Crow droppings Ta’i ha A kind of tree Also named (lo) dola ha, “crow’s Adam’s apple (tree),” this is a large tree whose wood is used as timber. The motivation for the metaphorical name is unclear.

CUCKOO-SHRIKE Black-faced cuckoo-shrike • Coracina novaehollandiae • CIO WOZA 314. When the cuckoo-shrike calls, only tears will fall Cio woza sezu, lu mata me’a bedhu News of a death always evokes sorrow A proverb heard mostly in planting songs. For Nage, the cry (or “voice,” sezu) of the cuckoo-shrike manifests the soul of a dead relative come to call another to death and is therefore a sign that someone has just died or is about to die (see No. 355, regarding a substitution of the cuckoo-shrike for the goshawk). However, the bird’s appearance can signify other things (Forth 2004, 86–7). According to one of several formulations, if a cuckoo-shrike flies from one end of a village to the other along the landward-seaward axis (zétalau), then a death is indicated, whereas if it flies across a village, from one of the longer sides to the other (mena-zale), then this presages the arrival of a guest. While sezu and bedhu display assonance, the English glosses “call” and “fall,” quite coincidentally, rhyme.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

191

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 192

DOLLARBIRD Common or oriental dollarbird • Eurystomus orientalis • KAKA DAZA 315. Dollarbird Kaka daza A person with a raucous laugh A person who is “(like) a dollarbird” or “laughs like a dollarbird” (tawa bhia ko’o kaka daza) is someone whose laugh resembles the bird’s harsh cry (Coates and Bishop 1997, 386), replicated in the first component of its name. (Nage interpret kaka in kaka kea, the name of the Yellow-crested cockatoo, in the same way, but the two birds are not included in a single folk-taxon.)

DRONGO Wallacean drongo • Dicrurus densus • CÉCE 316. Drongo’s tail We’o céce Head hair ending in the back in long, whispy strands; a person with such hair The expression is usually applied to men’s hair. Classified by Nage as a “witch bird,” one of several species thought to manifest angry witches, the drongo is a noisy, aggressive bird with black plumage. Its most distinctive physical feature, however, is its long bifurcate tail, which informs two of the three drongo metaphors. 317. Like a drongo’s broken tail Bhia na’a we’o céce beta, A person who changes topic “Broken” (beta) refers to the the drongo’s bifurcate tail, which gives the appearance of having been split in two. The phrase was described as referring, more specifically, to a person who, shortly after someone has introduced a topic, digresses or begins talking about something else – or specifically in view of the “broken” tail, something “unconnected” – possibly in order to deliberately change the subject.

192

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 193

318. The drongo has something, the friarbird does not Ana céce nabu ne’e, ana koka nabu mona Someone has something, another does not Nage were unable to provide a complete exegesis of this expression, both a proverb and a lyric in a planting song, but one man interpreted it as an exhortation to share, noting that, according to Nage values, a person (here represented by the drongo) who has something should share it with people who have nothing (represented by the friarbird). Empirically, the combination of the two species probably reflects the similar characters of drongos and friarbirds, both noisy and aggressive birds with raucous cries. At the same time, a prosodic factor is suggested by the assonance of céce (drongo) and ne’e (“to have, to be present”) and of koka (friarbird) and mona (“no, not”). The insertion of ana (“child”) before the names of the birds provides another example of the contextual use of this term, not to specify an immature specimen of an animal but instead to individualize the zoological category.

DUCK 319. Duck scooping up everything Bébe tolo sogho A voracious, undiscriminating eater who consumes all available food One of several metaphors used to describe or mildly rebuke people who are considered greedy, the relevant image is a duck shovelling up food with its bill. 320. Walk like a duck La’a bhia ko’o bébe A person with a waddling gait Bébe (duck) can be reduplicated in this expression as bébe bébe. The phrase may be applied more often to women than to men and was said usually to refer to someone who walks slowly and laboriously owing to infirmity caused by injury, illness, or advanced age, or simply because a person has very short legs. The source of the metaphor is domestic rather than wild ducks (bébe

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

193

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 194

ae, “freshwater” or “river ducks”); as commentators remarked, wild ducks can move quickly, both bipedally and in flight. As keeping ducks is a practice introduced in the twentieth century, the expression is evidently of recent coinage. Nevertheless, it is a point of interest that both English-speakers and Nage compare waddling in humans to the method of bipedal motion characteristic of Anseriformes – an apparently ineluctable similarity.

EAGLE Various species (see Forth 2004a, 20) • KUA or KUA MÉZE 321. Eagle calls seaward from the top of a lontar palm, pitying the father (man) who died before his time Kua no’i lau lobo koli, mesu ame ulu mata po’i Mourners lamenting the death of a man Described by Nage as the largest of birds (the optional component of the name, méze, means “big”) and as one of the “witch birds,” eagles are less prominent in Nage metaphors than might be expected, although the point applies equally to other birds of prey. The present expression forms part of the lyrics of a song of mourning and appears to be motivated mainly by a resemblance between the high-pitched cries of eagles and other raptors and the keening of mourners. It might also seem relevant that Nage associate a variety of raptorial birds and their vocalizations, especially when heard at night, with witches and other malevolent spirits, which in turn they regularly identify as the agents of human deaths. But this interpretation does not clearly fit with the referent of the present metaphor. Although the expression specifies a male death, Nage do not associate eagles exclusively with men. A metaphor commonly complementing “eagle calls seaward” is “goshawk cries upstream” (No. 355), in reference to which I offer further analysis of both. Although the total expression reveals instances of assonance and rhyme, these do not include the eagle’s name (kua) and hence cannot be a factor motivating the bird’s selection as the vehicle of this metaphor.

194

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 195

322. Eagle peering (staring) at a chicken Kua déni manu Someone who looks intently at a person or state of affairs in order to assess a situation, possibly to seek an advantage The expression more particularly describes an eagle perched high in a tree, preparing to swoop down on a fowl that is not aware of the raptor’s presence or attention. The metaphor can also be used to criticize a person who stares for a reason unknown or who looks on without taking action – for example, when practical assistance might be expected. 323. Eagle owl Po kua The largest kind of owl (Tyto spp.) As a term distinguishing large kinds of animals within more inclusive categories, kua occurs in two other metaphors (Nos. 324, 325). “Eagle owl” is the common English name for Bubo bubo, the largest European owl. Although this is a different species that does not occur in Indonesia, the similarity in naming is worth remarking nonetheless. 324. Eagle pig Wawi kua A variety of wild pig As kua in this context has other interpretations (Forth 2016, 97–8), the inclusion of this metaphorical name is provisional. Nevertheless, the pigs were once described as being named after eagles owing to their ability to “fly,” that is, to leap into and cling onto vines and tree branches (see No. 483). 325. Eagle porcupine Kutu kua A large kind of porcupine Nage contrasts this kind to a smaller kind named kutu pudi (see No. 174).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

195

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 196

ESTRILDINE FINCH • Lonchura spp. PETI or ANA PETI, Amandava amandava • BIO 326. Ana bio (finch) moves up and down, ana bao moves to the left and right Ana bio bido bido, ana bao bado bado A number of people working together The referent is provisional. “Ana bio” is heard in work songs, including songs performed while hauling wood and breaking new ground – both tasks performed by a number of people working in concert. In this context, some commentators identified the term as referring to a small passerine bird, and, as recorded elsewhere (Forth 2004a, 17), the simpler form, bio, may distinguish the Red avadavat Amandava amandava, a distinctively coloured finch. In central Keo, the cognate mbio denotes a more general category of small birds, corresponding to Nage peti or ana peti, while in Keo metaphor mbio, as a bird name, refers to a large number of people coming together with a common purpose (Tule 1998, 100). On the other hand, ana bao (or bao) does not name a bird and most likely functions in the present expression simply as a phonological contrast to ana bio. Insofar as bido and bado refer to movement in opposite directions, other factors motivating bao include assonance with bado combined with the comparable assonance of bio and bido, and the overall alliterative effect of the four elements in combination. Indeed, in contexts in which the lyrics are sung – people working in concert where coordinated movement is important – the rhythmic quality of the phrases is probably more significant than their actual metaphorical content. 327. Little red munia up on the side of the volcano Ana peti to mo zéle lima lobo (Referent uncertain) Although the focal referent of ana peti is munias and other Estrildine finches, a status now being usurped by the recently arrived Tree sparrow (Passer montanus), the term denotes a variety of small birds and in some contexts can even mean “bird in general.” Mentioned in a children’s song, “little red munia” is not a standard folk taxonomic name. However, Nage

196

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 197

sometimes interpret the phrase as describing ana peti jata (“Brahminy kite munia”), the Pale-headed munia Lonchura pallida, whose plumage is indeed mostly reddish. 328. Bird areca Heu peti Smaller sort of areca nuts Areca is the palm Areca cathecu, the nuts of which are chewed with betel fruit or leaves. 329. Bird droppings Ta’i peti A kind of banyan tree (Ficus spp.) According to one local interpretation, the tree is so named because, as a parasite, it grows on other trees, its seeds then falling on these just as do bird droppings (together with which the seeds may indeed be deposited). However, since this equally applies to other trees of the genus Ficus, why the name specifies a single kind of banyan remains unclear. 330. Birds urinate (grass) Peti cio (ku peti cio) A kind of grass with small flowers As small birds (peti) are said to use the grass (ku) as nesting material, the name could reflect the image of birds, sitting in such nests, urinating on the grass. In both this and the preceding metaphor (No. 329) peti should be understood as a general term for small passerine birds.

FALCON Peregrine falcon • Falco peregrinus • BELE TEKA 331. Tongue like a falcon (or a falcon’s wing) Lema bhia bele teka A sharp-tongued person, someone whose speech is dangerous and causes others great distress

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

197

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 198

Designating the Peregrine, the swiftest of falcons, the name bele teka means “sharp wing”; thus in this expression the term can be glossed either as “falcon” or “falcon’s wing.” Even so, the focus is clearly on the bird’s wing, for it is not the falcon’s tongue that is considered “sharp” – only the tongue of a human whose tongue is compared to the Peregrine’s wing. Nage moreover describe the falcon as killing prey not with its talons or bill but by severing their heads with its sharp wing (Forth 2016, 258), hence the motivation for the metaphor is obvious. Insofar as falcons do not in fact kill prey with their wings, the metaphor appears to be founded on an incorrect interpretation of the bird’s wing shape, an error enshrined in the bird’s name. As one man remarked, the metaphor refers to people whose words can harm others and even cause fatal illness and so eventually kill them. As such, it sometimes describes a person who issues a curse. More direct and, Nage say, “coarser” ways of describing an ability or propensity to curse include ngi’i le’e, lema teka, “teeth that are sharp, tongue that injures,” and wiwi bai isi, lema bai teka, “lips exceedingly full (containing too many words), tongue extremely sharp.” An alternative to the last is lema ba’i lebo, “tongue that is too fertile.” In the first expression le’e (qualifying “teeth”) was described as a dialectal term synonymous with Nage teka, “sharp,” by an informant who remarked how metaphors often combine a mixture of local and external terms. In central Nage le’e means “bow” (the weapon).

FANTAIL • Rhipidura spp. • CEKA 332. Fantail does not want to agree Ana ceka bhia ngazo A fickle woman who quickly changes her mind As its English name suggests, fantails are small passerine birds whose most distinctive feature is the way they characteristically spread out their tails like a fan (see figure 20). The present metaphor is heard in the lyrics of a song in which, in the following line, the bird is further described as “hobbling to the left and right” (ceka pi’u pebha pebha). This characterization probably reflects the habit of the Brown-capped fantail Rhipidura diluta – the usual if not the sole referent of ceka – of quickly wagging its tail from side to side (Coates and Bishop 1997, 454), an apt symbol of indecision or ambivalence.

198

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 199

Figure 20 Fantail (No. 332)

333. Fantail is present at noontide, (but) the stubtail does not want to address (the bird) Ana ceka leza, ana bama bhia mega (Referent uncertain) Occurring as lyrics in a planting song associating several kinds of birds with parts of the day, the phrases conceivably refer to a person who is clearly present but whom another does not wish to acknowledge. Both the fantail and stubtail are small passerine birds encountered in daylight. But neither is specifically associated with midday, either in Nage symbolism or ecological fact, and while the name of the fantail (ceka) is palpably linked with the noontide (leza) by virtue of assonance, the opposition of the two birds seems mainly to reflect their contrasting morphology. Whereas the fantail has a prominent tail, the stubtail, as attested by the bird’s English moniker, has

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

199

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 200

Figure 21 Man with “Fantail’s Tail” hair (No. 334)

virtually no tail at all, and Nage characterize it as “tailless.” As explained elsewhere (Forth 2017b), the stubtail is an omen bird whose call is especially inauspicious when heard around noon, and this idea is possibly relevant to the bird’s not greeting the fantail at noontide. At the same time, one commentator described the stubtail’s attributed reluctance as abnormal since these birds will vocalize whenever anyone encounters (mega) them. In the second phrase bhia (a homonym of bhia, “like, resembling”) renders the negative, “not to want, to refuse to,” a synonym of the more familiar bau, which is used in dialects spoken to the east and south of central Nage. 334. Fantail’s tail We’o ceka Frizzy or very curly head hair, a person with such hair Hair described as like the tail of a fantail tends to stick or spread out and so is not easily secured in a knot or bun, nor easily combed.

200

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 201

FRIARBIRD Helmeted friarbird • Philemon bueceroides • KOKA In symbolic contexts Nage know the friarbird mainly as the principal herald of the dawn and as the bird that in origin mythology champions the present order of the world, including, most notably, the regular alternation of daylight and night and the origin of death and birth. The bird’s garrulous cries can also be interpreted as conveying specific messages and as possessing oracular value (Forth 2004a, 99). Thus, in a children’s song composed during the colonial period, the friarbird is depicted as instructing youngsters to attend school and become Christians (ibid., 181). Like other nectar feeders, friarbirds are noisy and quarrelsome birds and, while fighting over blossoms, will attack one another as well as other birds. This aggressive character and the bird’s vocal prominence inform the majority of Nage friarbird metaphors. 335. A friarbird cries suddenly, the cocks immediately know (to crow) Koka sedho sa ghedho, manu kako be’o pau Some things necessarily precede others, certain things cannot happen unless something else comes first A proverb that, in effect, admonishes people not to sleep too late and to start agricultural labours early. The first phrase was originally recorded as koka sedho sa wedho (understanding wedho as “briefly, [in] an instant,” Forth 2004a, 184). If not more correct, ghedho (suddenly; see tau ghedho, “to startle”) is at least an acceptable variant. Either way, the expression refers to the early morning calling of both friarbirds and domestic cocks and a notion that cocks begin to crow only after the first friarbird has called. (Cocks of course crow several times during the course of the night, but this refers to the cock crow around sunrise.) Be’o, “to know,” also means “to be able,” thus further suggesting that the friarbird’s cry enables the cocks to crow. Hence the phrases convey the general sense of one thing necessarily preceding another and further suggest that people too should follow the order of nature and, like the cocks, should rise not long after hearing the friarbird’s morning call. An alternative to the second phrase is manu kako to’o walo, “cocks crow waking up again,” thereby implying yet another metaphorical identification of domestic fowls and human beings. The combination of sedho (generally understood as “to call out” but apparently meaning, more specifically, “to

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

201

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 202

utter a brief cry”) and ghedho (“suddenly”) reveals the influence of rhyme; in other expressions the friarbird’s vocalizing is expressed instead with polu (“to call, cry”) or sezu (“to vocalize, speak”). 336. Chest like a friarbird Kasa bhia koka A thin person The phrase refers especially to a man with a thin chest, with little muscle or fat and whose ribs show. The expression can be counted as a variant of the general friarbird metaphor, listed below. 337. Friarbird Koka Someone who is thin but also energetic and loquacious The usage draws on the Nage idea that the friarbird, a scrawny bird whose calls are loud and repetitious, owes its slender build to the energy it expends in continuous vocalization. Variant interpretations include: a thin, longnecked person; someone who is always on time; and a messenger or bringer of news. The second refers to the value of the friarbird’s calls as chronological signs, as the birds always call noisily just before sunrise and sunset (see Forth 1992; Forth 2007b). In a further application, “friarbirds” applies to combatants in pugilistic competitions (etu) who grab and hold onto one another as friarbirds do when they fight with wings and feet. Nage describe friarbirds as fighting with such vigour that they are sometimes knocked off their perches and fall to the ground. 338. Friarbird cries “iko ako” and gets (whatever it wants) with the utmost ease Ana koka iko ako tei noa noa talo A person of good fortune who is always successful in his or her endeavours Heard in a planting song, this expression immediately follows one discussed earlier in which the friarbird is contrasted to the drongo (see No. 318). As mentioned elsewhere (Forth 2004a, 182), the present metaphor is consistent not only with the friarbird’s palpably aggressive character but also with the

202

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 203

Figure 22 Friarbird (No. 337)

bird’s more general use as a representation of a “vociferous and persistently vocal person.” As a proverb, it may recall the English aphorism “the squeaky wheel gets the grease.” Replicating a call that, if not squeaky, has been characterized as “clanking” (99) and comprised of “harsh, metallic whistles or cackles” (Simpson and Day 1993, 226), iko ako denotes the cry of the friarbird. Although talo usually means “to be unable (to do something),” in the present expression it functions as an intensifier when preceded by a reduplicated modifier (in this case noa, “easy, easily”). 339. Friarbird does not reveal the news, oriole has already learned by itself Ana koka mona toda, ana leo me’a be’o Someone who already knows something without being informed As a proverb, the phrases proclaim that people do not always need others to tell them things in order to know them. While the selection of the friarbird is fully consistent with this bird’s vocal prominence and the notion that its

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

203

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 204

cries can convey messages, the metaphorical deployment of the oriole appears ornithologically more arbitrary and mainly to reflect the virtual rhyming of leo (“oriole”) and be’o (“to know”). On the other hand, orioles are noisy birds with a variety of loud calls (Coates and Bishop 1997, 413) that, as Nage recognize, feed in the same trees and sometimes fight with friarbirds, so these factors too may contribute to their metaphorical co-occurrence. 340. Friarbird has yet to obtain anything, Ana koka nabu mona. See The drongo has something (No. 318) 341. Friarbird immediately gets stuck in Koka siba sowa An impulsive person who acts directly in response to a stimulus The phrase is a more elaborate variant of “friarbirds squabble” (No. 343) and, like the simpler statement, can be used in palm-tapping rituals. Siba means “directly, straightaway, immediately.” In other contexts, sowa, here translated as “to get stuck in,” conveys several senses, including “break (off, into),” “prise open,” and “strip, peel (off)” – as friarbirds are wont to do to flowers when feeding on nectar. Accordingly, a specific application of koka siba sowa is a man who, on seeing an attractive woman, immediately accosts her or even forces himself on her. 342. Friarbird that knocks down blossoms Koka ta’a wa’u wonga A person who always shows up when something attractive is available Consistent with a readily observed behaviour of these birds, the specific source of this metaphor is a friarbird spotting a tree in blossom and proceeding to feed on the nectar with such haste and vigour that flower petals get knocked to the ground. Other commentators related the expression more to the bird’s noisy vocalizations and interpreted it as referring to people who talk a lot, just as friarbirds make a lot of noise when they spot blossoms. 343. Friarbirds squabble, Koka sowa. See Sunbirds throng (No. 412)

204

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 205

344. Neck like a friarbird Foko bhia ko’o koka A long-necked person This is a more specific variant of “friarbird” (No. 337). Although not extremely long, the thin neck of the friarbird is quite distinct and, in relation to its fairly large head, is certainly reminiscent of the neck of a gangly human. 345. Veins of a friarbird Ua koka A wiry, energetic person; a person who is thin or rangy but nevertheless strong As an anatomical term, Nage ua (corresponding closely to Indonesian urat, “vein, sinew, tendon, nerve”) refers to several “lines” in the body, but in this context it seems mainly to denote the veins – veins and arteries being more pronounced on lean bodies. As Nage recognize, the metaphor reflects the thin, scrawny appearance of the friarbird combined with its energetic and aggressive nature. In a related sense, ua denotes the entrails of chickens and livers of pigs used in augury, evidently by reference to the “lines” in these organs from which various meanings can be divined, and in ua koka one might discern an allusion to the bird’s “good fortune” expressed in other friarbird metaphors. Particular instances of the expression I recorded include “you have a body like the veins of a friarbird, you are mischievous” (kau weki bhia ua koka, kau maku bhalo), words of anger addressed to misbehaving children; and “just like a friarbird’s veins” (bhia na’a ua koka kema), describing a slim but solidly built person who works energetically. 346. Friarbird ant Wéwo koka A kind of large ant This is a folk-taxonomic name understood by Nage as reflecting the long “neck” of the ant and thus its resemblance to the friarbird. The meaning of wéwo is uncertain. According to one man, wéwo may originally have been

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

205

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 206

féwu, describing the extreme irritation caused by the bites of certain ants (cf. Ngadha févu, “continuous itching on the hands and feet,” Arndt 1961). Koka might then be construed, not as the name of the bird, but in its other sense, as “disgusting, nauseating,” in which case the name would not be a bird metaphor at all. But this speculative interpretation appears to be less widely known and accepted than the one linking the ant and the friarbird. 347. Friarbird calls in the morning, fantail shows (that it is) midday Ana koka polu poa, ana ceka pea leza A reference to association of different birds with different parts of the day, organizing the daily round The phrases occur in the lyrics of a planting song. The fantail’s notional association with the middle part of the day is discussed earlier (No. 333). In the present expression, the association contrasts with and complements the friarbird’s significance as a herald of the dawn and the bird’s association with both the beginning and ending of daylight (see No. 350). 348. Friarbird calls waking (people) up Koka sedho tau bugu to’o Time in the early morning when people should be getting up This is another chronological usage referring to the early morning cries of friarbirds and, more specifically, the birds’ earliest cries, heard before sunrise. As a reference to the friarbird’s call, sedho occurs in another metaphor (No. 335), which the present usage closely resembles. 349. Friarbird heralds the dawn, Imperial pigeon points to the daylight Ana koka ola pea poa, ana zawa ola pea da Daybreak as indicated by the calls of these birds From the lyrics of a song, this is yet another reference to the friarbird’s cries as heralding a new day, in the present instance complemented by a reference to the similar significance of the calls of the Imperial pigeon (Ducula aenea).

206

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 207

350. Friarbird orders, reserves the sun Koka na’u leza Late afternoon, when the sun is low Another chronological usage, the phrase conveys the idea that, by calling at this time, friarbirds arrange with the sun to meet early the following morning since the birds begin vocalizing as the sun is setting, just as they do before it comes up again. Although the sun is represented as an anthropomorphic being in Nage myth, as in some respects is the friarbird, how far these images apply in the present context is unclear, and there is no indication that Nage understand this phrase as meaning that, like a sentient being, the sun is actually instructed by or enters into an agreement with the calling birds. Although others disagreed, one man claimed that the phrase actually describes friarbirds as “making an arrangement” not with the sun but with humans who, by way of their calls, they inform that the sun will soon set and that they should soon return from their fields. Usually equated with Indonesian pesan (“to order, instruct, command,” “to reserve [e.g., a space]”), na’u has the more reciprocal sense of “making an appointment or agreement” with someone, especially to meet at a particular future time. Here glossed as “sun” (more completely named mata leza), leza can also mean “day, daylight.” 351. Friarbird night Kobe koka A day deleted from a lengthy ritual undertaking; to perform a rite on a reduced scale Illuminating this usage is the mythological desire of the friarbird that night and day should alternate rapidly. Employed in several ritual contexts, the phrase can refer to speeding up a lengthy undertaking by dispensing with a day of inactivity that should normally intervene between component rites of a ceremonial sequence. To expedite this, participants pretend to sleep for a time, then someone imitates a cock’s crow and everyone rises and continues as though a night had passed (Forth 2007b, 498).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

207

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 208

FRUIT DOVE • Ptilinopus spp. or Flores green pigeon • Treron floris • BOPO 352. Fruit dove flies down from the volcano, flies and alights not missing a single morning (and) sees a banyan tree with leaves full of fruit Ana bopo co zéle mai lobo, co ko’a mona peta poa tei nunu ta’a li’e wale wunu A person continually drawn to someone of the opposite sex whom he or she therefore visits constantly The fruit of banyan trees are a preferred food of Fruit doves, as of other pigeons and doves. The phrases are among the lyrics of songs sung by men and women while working in fields and exemplify the genre named pata néke, involving reciprocal teasing between the two genders. The verses are sung in turn by men and women. Depending on who sings, the Fruit dove is a man who continually visits a woman or a woman who is constantly drawn to a man. The banyan fruit is a person of the opposite sex whose house (or “tree”) the dove visits each morning or, according to one commentator, a number of people of the opposite sex to whom a person is drawn. The lyrics can be followed by others, which refer to a Fruit dove and an Imperial pigeon together (see No. 353). 353. Fruit dove swallows (fruit) whole, Imperial pigeon goes for overripe (fruit) Ana bopo ta’a tolo beghu mogo, ana zawa dole te’a lala Young people “consume” young people (of the opposite sex), older people choose older people (of the opposite sex) Also exemplifying the genre named pata néke, these phrases complement the previous metaphor (No. 352). As commentators explained, in the present expression “Fruit dove” refers to young people, including virgins, while “swallowing whole” alludes to enthusiastically consuming fresh fruit. “Imperial pigeon” then refers to an elderly widow or widower, without teeth, who is obliged to consume fruit that is rotten ripe (te’a lala). As is common in this sort of performance, the gender of the subject and object varies according to

208

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 209

which sex is singing. Assonance is revealed in the series bopo (Fruit dove), tolo, and mogo and again in zawa (Imperial pigeon) and lala. The apparent connection between doves and heterosexual love evident in this and the preceding expression may recall English metaphors. As Christine Ammer (1989, 161) remarks, “doves have long been thought to be amorous birds, and the adjective lovey-dovey has been used with that meaning since the early 19th century.” She then further suggests that this association “may come from the birds’ billing and cooing – the touching of beaks and soft murmuring noises – which also have been transferred to human behavior to mean kissing and whispering endearments” (emphasis in original). In both of the Nage expressions, however, the doves are described not as being attracted to others of their kind but to fruit. Thus the metaphors have their source in bird behaviour of a different sort – although one expressing an even more widespread, and probably universal, conceptual metaphor, linking food with sex and eating with sexual intercourse. 354. Fruit dove merely makes threats, Fruit dove appeals to goshawk Bopo ugha agha bholo, bopo wito ne’e sizo (Referent uncertain) These are successive verses from a nonsense rhyme, sometimes sung (see Forth 2004a, 195, for the full text). Although also belonging to the genre named pata néke, Nage I questioned were unable to identify specific referents. In the same context, the crow (ha) too is described as making threats (ugha agha), and the distinctive flight of the cockatoo (kea bele li’o lénga, see No. 306) also receives mention.

GOSHAWK • Accipiter spp. • SIZO 355. Goshawk cries upstream from the top of a coconut palm, pitying the mother whose death was premature Sizo io zéta lobo nio, mesu ine ulu mata ‘ibo Mourners lamenting the death of a woman

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

209

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 210

The goshawk’s name, sizo, means “to attack from the side,” an apt description of the hunting method of this fast and low-flying bird of prey. The expression complements “an eagle calls seaward …” (No. 321). Taken together, the two expressions reveal several parallelisms, zéta//lau, “upstream//downstream”; koli//nio, “lontar palm//coconut palm”; ame//ine, “father (man)//mother (woman)”; mata po’i//mata ‘ibo, both denoting an early death; and of course, kua//sizo, “eagle//goshawk.” Lontar palms, it should be noted, grow only in dry, coastal regions and therefore outside of central Nage territory, whereas coconut palms occur in all regions. However, the association of the two birds with the two trees is ornithologically arbitrary, and in the case of the goshawk is evidently motivated only by the assonance of the bird’s name, its cry (io), and the name of the coconut (nio; see also the rhyme of io and nio). In the present expression, sizo io (“goshawk cries”) can be replaced by mole sio, a dialectal name for the cuckoo-shrike, in central Nage called cio woza. As noted, a vocalizing cuckoo-shrike can be a death omen (No. 314) as contextually can cries attributed to raptorial birds, while sio in the dialectal name of the cuckoo-shrike, in relation to both nio (coconut palm) and also ‘ibo, maintains the prosody otherwise initiated by sizo (“goshawk”).

GROUND-DOVE Emerald ground-dove • Chalcophaps indica • MUKE 356. Crop (craw) of a ground-dove Héke muke Breasts of an adolescent girl Usually expressed as a “(having) breasts like a ground-dove’s crop,” the phrase describes a young woman whose breasts are just beginning to develop. The Emerald ground-dove is a relatively small dove. But since héke denotes the crop of any bird (including chickens), the occurrence of muke is evidently motivated more by prosodic considerations and, specifically, by the occurrence of ke as the final syllable of both words. A somewhat derogatory usage, “breasts like a ground-dove’s crop” is one of several similar phrases Nage employ in hunting chants, where they direct abuse at game animals and their spirit owners.

210

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 211

357. Ground-dove and (Spotted) dove up in the hills Zéle wolo muke ne’e kolo People seeking the company of others like themselves The phrase occurs in a song, where it complements “quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands” (No. 392) and where both pairs of birds are described as “living in friendship side by side” and “always traveling together” (Forth 2004a, 184–5). Comparable to the English proverb “birds of a feather flock together” and its biblical precedent “Birds dwell with their own kind” (Ammer 1989, 139–40; see also I Corinthians 15:39), the pairings are motivated by morphological and behavioural resemblances between members of each pair. The two species of doves both belong to the Columbidae, whereas quails and junglefowl are both members of the Phasianidae. In addition, the contrast of “hill” (wolo) and “lowlands, plain” (mala) accords with differences between the two birds with regard to habitat, although since some doves classified as kolo occupy both regions whereas others (the subclass named kolo dhoro, the Barred dove Geopelia maugei) are normally found in lowlands, the rhyme of kolo and wolo is apparently a further factor. In the present expression, “ground-dove” (muke) is sometimes replaced by “Imperial pigeon” (zawa; see below).

HERONS and EGRETS • Ardeidae • GASO TASI and O AE 358. Large heron Gako tasi A person who is exceptionally tall Both herons and egrets are long-legged birds, and this expression is largely synonymous with both No. 359 and another metaphor, incorporating the similarly long-legged waterhen (kuku raku, No. 416). A tall person can also be described as simultaneously resembling both a heron and an egret (bhia gako tasi o ae). Some Nage, however, distinguished “large heron” as referring specifically to a person who is not only tall but also more generally large-bodied, and “egret” as describing a tall, thin person – a distinction that accords with morphological differences between herons and generally smaller egrets.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

211

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 212

359. Egret or small heron O ae A long-legged person The metaphor is often expressed as “(having) legs like an egret” (taga bhia o ae). Ae is “water” and has presumably been added to distinguish the bird from other referents of o, a lexeme that, as a bird name, has evidently been reduced from oro and orong (cognates designating the same species in other Flores languages) by the disappearance of /r/ in central Nage.

IMPERIAL PIGEON Green imperial pigeon • Ducula aenea • ZAWA 360. Friendly (only) with mute Imperial pigeons, conversing (only) with wild doves Moko ne’e zawa ngongo, io ea ne’e kolo béla A person who is banished and thus separated from all human kin and companions Addressed to someone who is told his or her only companions will be wild pigeons and doves, the phrases form part of a traditional curse banishing a person from his or her home settlement. Zawa ngongo denotes a kind of imperial pigeon Nage distinguish from the Green imperial pigeon (Ducula aenea, simply named zawa) on the ground that it hardly vocalizes, making a mumbling sound like a person unable to speak (ngongo is “mute”). Further described by Nage as possessing dark plumage and not flocking, unlike the Green imperial pigeon (which occur in flocks of several dozens), the bird in question may be the Dark-backed imperial pigeon Ducula lacernulata (Coates and Bishop 1987, 327, 328). The fact that the exile’s avian companions include birds that are mute evidently emphasizes the extent of his/her ordained isolation. At the same time, conversing only with doves deemed unable to speak, an ironic contradiction, provides the sort of contrast within an overall similarity that is typical of Nage parallelistic idioms. Modifying kolo (small doves of the genera Streptopelia and Geophilia), béla, “feral,” is not part of the proper name of any bird and in this context merely underscores the occurrence of the doves in places beyond human habitation.

212

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 213

361. Egg of an Imperial pigeon Telo zawa An only child A child without siblings – a relatively rare and therefore remarkable occurrence among Nage – is described as ana bhia telo zawa, “child like a pigeon’s egg.” The usage reflects the fact, recognized equally by Nage and international ornithologists, that Green imperial pigeons, the specific referent in this case, usually lay just a single egg. While this behaviour sufficiently motivates the metaphor, the pigeon’s reproductive habit is further consistent with the appearance of the Imperial pigeon in a myth concerning the origin of death and also birth (Forth 1992, 2007b). In the myth, the pigeon – in contrast to its opponent, the friarbird (koka) – argues that humans, who at this point do not yet know death, should not be prolific and that couples should have no more than a single child. 362. Imperial pigeon goes for overripe (fruit), Ana zawa dole te’a lala. See Fruit dove swallows (fruit) whole (No. 353) 363. Imperial pigeon points to the daylight, Ana zawa ola pea da. See Friarbird heralds the dawn (No. 349) 364. Imperial pigeons alight Zawa ko’a Twilight, the time of day around 5:30 p.m. The exact reference is the time just before sunset, when Imperial pigeons alight in trees to roost for the night. Reflecting the belief that forest spirits (nitu) live an existence similar to humans but do everything in reverse, a more elaborate version of the phrase is zawa ko’a nitu dhou, “Imperial pigeons alight (while) the spirits go down to their fields.” The hour denoted is of course the time of day when people return from their fields, having “gone down” (dhou) around sunrise. In this respect, then, the activity of the pigeons coincides with that of humans – both “going home” at the same time – which thus suggests a further metaphorical component of the expression. Consistent with the idea that spirits are on the move at this time, Nage maintain that young children should not fall asleep at this hour. Parents

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

213

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 214

therefore say to children “Imperial pigeons are roosting (so) do not sleep” (zawa ko’a ana mae nade), and to protect them from harm from mobile spirits, they mark their foreheads with a charcoal smudge. Nage also regard zawa ko’a as the best time to go line fishing for eels, as this is the time when eels feed.

JUNGLEFOWL Green junglefowl • Gallus varius • KATA 365. Face like a junglefowl cock Ngia bhia kata lalu A man with a striking, animated face A wild bird, the junglefowl closely resembles its close domestic relative, the chicken Gallus gallus, a descendant of the red junglefowl that still occurs wild in parts of western Indonesia. One commentator described a person with the face of a junglefowl as “wild looking” (using Indonesian liar, “wild, not tame”) and another as a man whose eyes dart about. Not at all pejorative, the expression refers to someone with an imposing stare, arguably not unlike a male junglefowl and, by the same token, a domestic cock. 366. Junglefowl alighting in undergrowth Kata ko’a koba A vagrant or wanderer, someone who maintains residence in two or more places A synonym is kata na ko’a, “junglefowl alights wherever (it chooses).” Nage describe junglefowl as never staying long in a single spot or roosting in the same place. Thus, if a hunter sees a junglefowl alighting in long grass or scrub, when he proceeds to the spot the bird will already have flown. This behaviour seems never to have been recorded by international ornithologists, but on this ground the Nage report cannot of course be deemed incorrect. Owing to its reputed habit, the bird serves as one of several metaphors for people who regularly move from place to place and do not maintain a permanent residence. A somewhat comparable English metaphor for an itinerant person is “bird of passage,” which, however, denotes any sort of migratory bird (Palmatier 1995, 29).

214

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 215

Figure 23 Junglefowl cock (No. 365)

367. Live like a junglefowl Muzi bhia ko’o kata Someone who leads an irregular existence In regard to both referent and motivation, the metaphor is synonymous with No. 366 and conveys the opposite sense to a porcupine metaphor (No. 172). The alliteration of kutu, “porcupine,” and kata, “junglefowl,” is discussed with reference to the porcupine.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

215

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 216

368. Quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands, Lau mala piko ne’e kata. See No. 392 369. Reproducing like junglefowl in the lowlands Lala bhia kata mala Humans and livestock that are fertile and prolific Nage employ this phrase when making offerings to beneficent spirits, requesting that humans be as prolific as, among other things, junglefowl. In this context, the expression is typically conjoined to form standard parallelisms with “swarming like flocking quail” (ligo bhia piko wio) and “sprouting like riverside reeds” (bho bhia lelu lowo). Another usage pairing the two birds is “quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands” (No. 392). Although both species belong to the Phasianidae, the occurrence of the junglefowl (kata) in the present metaphor also suggests a prosodic motivation in regard to the assonance of kata, mala (“lowlands, plain”) and lala (“spread, proliferate”). The same applies to ligo, piko, and wio in the phrase referring to flocking quails. Indeed, in regard to junglefowls, prosody might as it were compensate for the fact that these birds appear not to produce especially large clutches, comprising, according to Nage, just four to six eggs.

KESTREL • Moluccan kestrel Falco moluccensis (a small falcon) • IKI or IKI TITI 370. A single kestrel Iki sa éko Something or someone just barely visible in the distance The smallest of birds of prey, a kestrel flying or hovering at some distance can appear very small indeed. 371. Kestrel on the western hill flies in circles (and) goes directly onward Ana iki ta’a wolo mena co leo ta’a siba leta A good person

216

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 217

The metaphor occurs in the lyrics of a song performed while planting or circle-dancing. Commentators could only describe the kestrel as a reference to “good people in general,” although, as discussed elsewhere (Forth 2004a, 188), the entire phrase may allude to the impermanence of any good thing. 372. Kestrel with an injured vulva Iki puki teka A person in pain uttering a high-pitched sound The selection of the female genitalia in this context appears motivated mainly by prosody involving the bird’s name and especially the second term in the expression. As commentators remarked, iki is selected because of the similarity between the bird’s high-pitched vocalization (imitated as ki ki ki ki), which inspires its onomatopoeic name, and someone squealing from pain – for example, from a sudden injury to the foot. 373. Shame-faced kestrel unable to pick up a child Iki mea rago (or ‘ago) talo ana Someone unable to properly perform parental duties and who is therefore ashamed The phrase occurs as the main line of a song performed at certain agricultural rituals (Po Wete and Po Uta). An example of the genre pata néke (in which the two genders tease and deride one another), the lyric is sung by groups of young men and women in turn, accompanied by rapid handclapping. The reference varies according to which sex is singing. ‘Ago, or the more often heard dialectal variant rago, means to pick up an infant or a young animal that is seated or lying down. In regard to children, it can also more generally mean comforting a child or looking after its needs. When addressed by men to women, the phrase therefore mockingly suggests that the women are unable to care for children. Some commentators suggested that women similarly criticize the men as being unable to provide for a family. However, according to a more likely interpretation, the expression in this case alludes to men who are unable to engage women in sex, or who, in the English colloquial phrase, are “unable to pick up a chick.” The interpretation accords with the typically sexually suggestive character of lyrics employed in pata néke. Yet some commentators denied it – perhaps surprisingly, as

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

217

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 218

Nage are often not shy about discussing sexual matters. (Iki, it may be noted, is a men’s personal name in central Nage.) During the accompanying dance, women hold small pieces of cloth that they wave in imitation of the fluttering flight of a hovering kestrel searching for or about to swoop down on prey. Although I never heard anyone mention it, the rapid hand-clapping probably serves the same symbolic purpose. Two other features of the Moluccan kestrel may motivate the bird’s metaphorical use in this context. First, like other birds of prey, kestrels prey on young chickens. Second, according to an ethologically less certain interpretation, when people take young kestrels from the nest – as is sometimes done, to raise them or give them to children to raise – the parent birds are never able to retrieve them (or pick them up again). The commentator who advanced this explanation thus suggested that the expression refers to people who have something taken away that they are unable to recover.

KINGFISHER • Halcyon spp., Caridonax fuldiga • FEGA 374. Kingfisher with its mouth (bill) open Fega ngafa A dull-witted person or someone who, contextually, is unable to understand something Three species of kingfishers occur in Nage country, partly distinguished as “river kingfishers” (fega ae) and “dry land, upland kingfishers” (fega wolo), but all kingfisher metaphors refer simply to fega. Also expressed as “having one’s mouth open like a kingfisher” (ngafa bhia ko’o fega), Nage explain the present metaphor as a reference to the habit of kingfishers, birds with long and stout bills, of holding their bills open while perching – evidently as a means of expelling body heat. As this shows, like Westerners (and probably people in other parts of the world), Nage interpret being open-mouthed, or “slack-jawed,” as a sign of temporary mental vacancy if not generally low intelligence. 375. Mouth like a kingfisher’s bill Mumu bhia ko’o fega A person whose lips are stained red from chewing betel and areca

218

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 219

The body part is alternatively specified as wunu mumu, “lips.” Nage describe kingfishers in general as having red bills, although one common species, the Collared kingfisher Halcyon chloris, does not. Betel leaf or fruit chewed with Areca palm nut and lime turns spittle bright red. Nowadays women who wear lipstick are also described as having mouths like a kingfisher’s bill. 376. Perching like a kingfisher Ko’a fega A house floor that slopes slightly towards the back of the building The metaphor describes a disapproved disposition among Nage, who require that floors of traditional houses (built on wooden piles), if not completely level, should slope slightly towards the front – an arrangement expressed as “stubtail’s arse” (see No. 410). Nage explain the usage with reference to the idea that the tails of perching kingfishers always point downwards, thus being held decidedly lower than the head, which is typically held erect. The metaphor is further discussed in Forth (2017a).

KITE especially the Brahminy kite • Haliastur indus • JATA Kites are large hawks. Also denoting a spinning wheel, as a bird name jata itself appears to be a metaphor, assuming the designation refers to the large raptor’s revolving flight. Brahminy kites and other birds of prey (including owls) are prominent in Nage symbolism by virtue of their association with witches and malevolent spirits, and they are also among the most common predators of domestic fowls. But neither significance finds expression in conventional metaphors. 377. High-flying kite sits atop the nest Ana jata jawa zéta wawo sa The soul of a dead person The “nest” is the grave of the deceased, over which the soul is described as hovering. As regards the bird representing the soul, this was previously suggested as a provisional interpretation (Forth 2004a, 189) but can now be confirmed. Although the name of the bird incorporates that of the Brahminy

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

219

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 220

kite (jata), for Nage jata jawa denotes a distinct bird with speckled or variegated plumage, as accords with jawa meaning “strange, unusual.” The appearance of a Brahminy kite (distinguishable as jata ulu bha, “white-headed jata”) can be situationally ominous, particularly when interpreted as a manifestation of malevolent mountain spirits (nitu) in search of sacrificial victims (see chapter 2 regarding the Nage identification of humans as spirit buffalo). But it is unlikely this idea holds any significance for Nage in the present expression, partly because no one mentioned it and partly because jata jawa, a bird distinct from the Brahminy kite, refers not to a death-dealing spirit but to a deceased human soul, indeed the possible victim of such a spirit. 378. Kite sighting smoke from a fire Jata tei nu api A person who sees a chance of profit in a situation and immediately proceeds to exploit it The metaphor has its source in the tendency of Brahminy kites and other raptors to gather in large numbers when forest is burnt, in anticipation of feasting on insects driven up by the flames and smoke. The usage is thus essentially equivalent to the English “vulture” metaphor, drawn from the behaviour of vultures circling over a dying animal. Nage compared the phrase to Indonesian ada gula ada semut, “where there is sugar there are ants.” A Lio version of the Nage metaphor, with roughly the same translation and also exploiting the Brahminy kite, is mbira tei api nu. 379. Of no value at all is the big kite sitting up on the great vine, who calls uttering only harsh sounds Haba ‘é’e ana jata méze zéle koba léke tau ie ghéghe ie ghéghe A harsh-voiced noisy person whose statements are without value According to a slightly different interpretation, the expression might more specifically refer to a high-ranking person whose words carry little weight. The metaphor occurs in a song lyric contrasting the kite to the friarbird and Imperial pigeon, whose calls announce the approach of daylight. Associated with no particular part of the day, the calls of the kite serve no such purpose

220

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 221

and indeed are quite worthless. Although the same could be said of many birds, the opposition finds further support in the fact that not only are the kite’s calls of no value, but the kite itself is a pestilential poultry thief and a bird of ill-omen. Although not affecting the bird’s name, many components of this lyric evidently reflect metrical demands of the genre, notably the assonance of ‘é’e (ugly, bad), méze (big), zéle (above, up in), léke (a large vine, liana) and ghéghe (“[to utter] harsh cries”). In another song, “kite uttering harsh sounds” refers instead to a lone person who longs for the company of others and whose cries express this sorrowful condition; these others are then represented by cockatoos and chickens (see No. 304), both birds that, in contrast to mostly singular kites, tend to flock. In the present expression, ana jata méze provides an especially clear instance of ana serving to individualize or personify an animal rather than alluding to small size. Indeed, the Brahminy kite (jata) is a large bird, as underlined in the present expression by the adjective méze, “big.” 380. Brahminy kite munia Ana peti jata, peti jata A small bird, the Pale-headed munia This is the folk taxonomic name of Lonchura pallida, whose rusty red and white plumage replicates that of the large bird of prey. Owing to this resemblance, some Nage regard the little bird as one of the symbolic class of “witch birds,” of which the kite is more definitely a member. 381. Kite’s claw pepper Ko kanga jata Hawk claw pepper (Capsicum sp.) Kanga can denote the entire digit of a bird, as distinct from the claw at the tip of the toe, designated as kungu (“nail” in humans). The name refers to the shape of this small pepper, resembling the claw or talon of a bird of prey, as does the plant’s virtually identical English name.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

221

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 222

KOEL Common koel • Eudynamys scolopacea • TOE OU 382. Koel coughs and sputters but does not get a single handful Toe ou ta’a ohu ohu mona mewi sa puju dho’u A person whose efforts or contributions are not rewarded The expression follows and is paired parallelistically with a lyric referring to the Channel-billed cuckoo in a planting song (see No. 256) and has exactly the same metaphorical reference. Koels are large black cuckoos that, like the even larger Channel-billed cuckoo, are brood parasites of crows. However, the association of the koel with the Channel-billed cuckoo in this and other metaphors has nothing to do with their identical parasitic habit but solely with the significance of their calls, both heard about the same time of year, at the transition of the dry and rainy seasons, when they serve a common chronological function. 383. Koel, you call in the morning Toe ou kau ta’a polu poa Someone providing useful information Occurring in another planting song, this expression also complements a phrase referring to the Channel-billed cuckoo (No. 257). The fact that in this and other usages incorporating the two birds, the larger bird is mentioned first is explained by Nage as reflecting the Channel-billed cuckoo’s habit of calling somewhat earlier than the koel. This agrees with the fact that that poa, here glossed as “in the morning,” can also mean “on another (future) day” or “at some (indefinite) time in the near feature,” but also noteworthy is the alliteration and partial assonance effected by the combination of polu (“to call [of a bird]”) and poa (“morning”) and polu and ou (the second part of the bird’s onomatopoeic name).

MYNAH Hill mynah • Gracula religiosa • IE WEA 384. Mynah calls tilting its head to one side Ie wea polu dobhe déna A person experiencing anguish at someone’s death

222

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 223

One of several bird metaphors included in songs of mourning, according to Nage dobhe déna refers to the Hill mynah’s habit of tilting and turning its head from side to side while vocalizing (Dobhe, “slant, slope,” and déna, “flat, level,” are combined to denote this alternating movement). How this relates to human anguish is less clear, although the bird’s habit could conceivably be associated with movements of the human head indicative of bewilderment or despair at news of the death of someone close. Unlike several other birds mentioned in mourning songs, Nage do not regard the mynah’s call as a death omen. The Hill mynah, whose name is alternatively pronounced as io wea, is also mentioned in a planting song (Forth 2004a, 191) as the complement of the Bare-throated whistler (kete dhéngi, see No. 418) – a connection consistent with the occurrence of both birds high in the forest canopy in elevated locations and also with the fact that both possess a range of vocalizations and are capable mimics. The mynah, of course, is a bird that can be trained to imitate human speech.

ORIOLE Black-naped oriole • Oriolus chinensis • LEO or LEO TE’A 385. Oriole has already learned by itself, Ana leo me’a be’o. See Friarbird does not reveal the news (No. 339) 386. Oriole fish Ika leo (ika léro) A grunter Mesopristes sp. The fish is mostly yellow, like the feathers of the oriole, for Nage the epitome of birds with yellow plumage. Here leo is alternatively rendered by dialectal léro, as it is in No. 387. 387. Oriole python Goka leo Timorese python Python timorensis Nage recognize the snake as being named after alternating yellow and black markings, resembling those of the Black-naped oriole. TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

223

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 224

Figure 24 Injured Black-naped oriole (No. 387)

388. Oriole gourd Hea leo A kind of cultivated gourd So named because the skin is of a yellow colour, this is one of several named kinds of hea (“gourd, pumpkin, vegetable marrow”).

OWL Various species of Strigidae and Tytonidae • PO and JE 389. Large owl Po kua A person who pulls a garment or blanket over the head to keep warm

224

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 225

Nage classification of owls, generally named po, is discussed in Forth (2004a, 61–79). Owls are the focal member of the symbolic class of “witch birds,” a category that also includes diurnal birds of prey, crows, and drongoes. The present usage, however, draws solely on a physical resemblance, and a person huddled up and covering the head, hair, and ears with clothing or a blanket and with only face and eyes exposed can, indeed, look “like a large owl” (bhia ko’o po kua). Po kua (kua is “eagle”) denotes the largest of owls known to Nage, probably most often a Barn owl (Tyto alba or T. longimembris), which unlike species of Otus lacks “ear” tufts or “horns.” Nowadays the metaphor is often applied to people who cover their heads with hoods attached to modern jackets or wear balaclavas. 390. Hawk-owl pretends to be close, advances pretending Je podi we’e A person who feigns friendship with someone in order to take advantage Je may refer to the Brown hawk-owl Ninox scutulata. Besides the name of a bird, je means “to advance slowly.” The metaphor describes the reputed behaviour of the owl, described by Nage as alighting near roosting fowls and gradually sidling up to chickens in order to seize one, all the while imitating the piping of a chick. Applied to humans, the metaphor can refer, for example, to a man who becomes friendly with a woman to obtain sexual favours. In the ‘Ua region, in the eastern part of central Nage, what is apparently the same bird is called po wése (po, “owl”) or wése je, and the second term is used metaphorically to describe a person behaving in the same way.

PIGEON Rock dove • Columba livia • KOLO DASI 391. Pigeon down by the ocean waves at Mbai Ana kolo dasi lau bata Bai The soul of someone recently deceased The expression occurs in a mourning song, where it precedes and complements “sea fowl cries pitying itself ” (No. 280). Nage mostly understand the lyric as referring to a dead soul, in which respect it recalls Christian representations of the Holy Ghost and the human soul as assuming the form of a

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

225

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 226

dove (see, e.g., Luke 3:22; Mathew 3:16). Among Nage, however, many birds besides pigeons and doves are considered manifestations of souls or are otherwise associated with souls. The same species that abounds in Western cities, the Rock dove, or “domestic pigeon,” is introduced in eastern Indonesia, but how long it has been present is unclear. Nage suggested that dasi is inserted after kolo to correspond with Bai, a location on Flores’s north coast. But, arguably, this makes sense only by virtue of the resemblance of dasi and tasi, a contextual reference to the sea, which is consistent with the location of the bird “by the ocean waves at Mbai.”

QUAIL Various species • PIKO or BEWU Nearly all metaphors referring to quails name the bird piko, a term specifically denoting the Brown quail Coturnix ypsilophora but also naming a more general category (or “folk-intermediate,” sensu Berlin 1992) that further includes the separately named Blue-breasted quail Coturnix chinensis (Nage mulu ki) and Buttonquails Turnix spp. (Nage bewu). As only one metaphor employs bewu (“buttonquail”), I have listed this with the others below. Nage describe quails (piko) as very short-tailed or even tailless birds and as birds that can never alight in trees. The origin of these traits is the topic of two traditional Nage narratives, yet neither motivates any Nage quail metaphor. 392. Quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands Lau mala piko ne’e kata People seek(ing) the company of others like themselves This metaphor is discussed earlier, with reference to the complementary expression “Ground-dove and (Spotted) dove up in the hills” (No. 357). 393. Quail that invites others along, dove that urges on friends Piko ta’a wito io, kolo ta’a ‘isi moko A person who seeks companionship or support of others of the same kind Forming part of a proverb, the metaphor is motivated by the flocking habits of quails and doves. However, it is also noteworthy that piko kolo (“quails

226

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 227

[and] doves”) is a standard composite denoting valued game birds that also do harm to crops; similarly “quails [and] rats” (piko dhéke) is a collective reference to various avian and mammalian crop pests. At the same time, prosody is evident in the assonance of piko, wito, and io and, in the complementary expression, kolo and moko (“friend, companion”). 394. Quails set down, piko bebe. See Doves fly away (No. 402) 395. Short quail Piko pada A person who is short and squat Quails are of course small, round, plump birds. Nage apply the phrase only to adults, not to children (unlike “small porcupine,” No. 174). Pada, “short, squat,” does not occur in the folk taxonomic name of any sort of quail or other bird, and in this expression serves only to emphasize the attribute of quails that renders them an appropriate metaphor for people of a certain body type. 396. Swarming like flocking quail, Ligo bhia piko wio. See Reproducing like junglefowl (No. 369) Ligo is sometimes replaced by synonymous ligho. The only meaning for wio commentators could identify was “Sumba (Island), Sumbanese.” As this makes no sense in the present context, the term may be inserted simply for metrical reasons. On the other hand, in ‘Ua, towards the eastern boundary of central Nage, wio occurs as the name of a passerine bird, possibly the Golden whistler Pachycephala pectoralis. 397. Highland quail Piko du’a A nocturnal sound Although piko du’a straightforwardly translates as “highland quail,” Nage do not definitely conceive of this entity, known only by its nocturnal call, as either a kind of quail or a bird of any sort. The call gives warning that a thief is about, looking to steal livestock, so that upon hearing it people should take ritual and practical preventative measures (Forth 2004a, 102).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

227

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 228

398. Buttonquail bean Hobho bewu A kind of string bean The cultivar is thus named, according to Nage, because markings on the small, multicoloured beans resemble those on the eggs of Buttonquails (Turnix spp.). 399. Quail bone(s) Toko piko A kind of grass; a vine The name refers to two plants: a kind of grass with edible leaves consumed cooked or raw and a thorny vine. The motivation is the thinness of the stems.

SCRUBFOWL Orange-footed scrubfowl • Megapodius reinwart • KOKO WODO 400. Scrubfowl that lays eggs but always leaves them behind Koko wodo telo ea telo ea A woman who bears children she does not raise, leaving them to the care of others A megapode, the Orange-footed scrubfowl lays its unusually large eggs underneath a large mound of earth and plant litter, the heat from which incubates them. Unlike other birds, therefore, the female scrubfowl does not sit on a clutch and, since several hens will lay eggs under the same mound, there are in fact no single nests. The behaviour is at least partially known to Nage, who describe the scrubfowl as “laying eggs on the ground but hatching them in (or from) a tree,” and as “knowing how to lay eggs but not knowing how to brood them” (telo be’o neke kéwo). Accordingly, Nage remark that whenever one comes across the bird, usually after hearing its calls, it is always sitting in a tree. Other ideas apparently relevant to the metaphor include the claim that a hen scrubfowl with eggs will gradually descend from its tree and that when it reaches the ground this means that the young have already hatched and are about to leave the nest mound. By then, the chicks are already quite large;

228

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 229

they are also relatively independent and do not follow the parent birds when searching for food. Instead, they look for food by themselves, and, Nage further assert, the mother birds will peck at young to ensure that they do so. The image of the scrubfowl as a poor parent is also found on Sumba, where “to have (raise) children like a scrubfowl (kaluki)” (paana kalukingu) describes people who do not look after their offspring by reference to the same nesting and egg-laying behaviour observed by the Nage (Forth 2000, 189). At present scrubfowl are rare in central Nage and apparently have always been more common in coastal regions. According to an evidently more fantastic idea, when scrubfowl eggs hatch those hatchlings that head in the direction of the sea become sea creatures. But this seems only to apply to scrubfowl found near the south coast. In coastal regions throughout Flores, a variant of this idea applies to sea turtles, whose hatchlings that turn towards dry land are said to become monitors, snakes, rats, and other non-marine creatures. Apparently relevant to this widespread belief is the fact that, like scrubfowl, sea turtles, after laying eggs in holes dug in sandy beaches, similarly leave the eggs to hatch on their own. In Lio, the scrubfowl is called manu wodo, thus incorporating manu, otherwise meaning “chicken” as in Nage. Wodo also occurs in three Nage metaphors incorporating the domestic fowl (Nos. 271, 278, 302). However, as the name of the scrubfowl, the term may have a different derivation (cf. e.g., Sumbanese wundu, “scrubfowl”), and in any case neither Lio nor Nage regard the bird as a kind of “chicken.” In the Nage name, koko is considered onomatopoeic. Although it cannot unambiguously be called a “totem,” the scrubfowl has a special association with a section of the Nage clan Mude (Forth 2004, 199a), a clan partly resident in ‘Ua (where I first recorded the present metaphor) and otherwise settled in villages not far from ‘Ua.

SPOTTED DOVE • Streptopelia chinensis and BARRED DOVE • Geopelia maugei • KOLO 401. Dove looking at a pool of water Kolo moni ae Someone who is present at some undertaking but does not actively participate or does not do so immediately

229

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 230

Figure 25 Young Barred doves (No. 401)

The phrase describes a thirsty dove that will not descend to drink at a pool of water but remains perched for a time until it feels that it is safe to do so. The expression refers, for example, to people who attend a discussion but do not speak or remain silent for a while before participating. Nage kolo denotes not only the Spotted dove (distinguishable as kolo méze, “big kolo”) but also the Barred dove Geopelia maugei (kolo dhoro or kolo ghodho). Related terms in other eastern Indonesian languages refer to birds more generally (Forth 2006), a sense also suggested by the Nage composite peti kolo, which is similarly used for birds in general. In fact, this broader sense is implicit in the

230

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 231

present metaphor, since not just doves but birds of many kinds will hesitate before flying to the ground to drink or feed. 402. Doves fly away, quails set down Kolo co, piko bebe One person or family abandons a field, after which another begins cultivating there An alternative to the second phrase is piko begu, “quails alight (on the ground).” The metaphor reflects a comparison of one kind of bird setting down in a place previously occupied by a bird of another kind with different groups of people who successively cultivate a plot. Apart from the association of doves and quails enshrined in the standard composite piko kolo, the association of the two birds in the present metaphor is evidently motivated by their largely common habitats and the fact that both feed on grain, as do human cultivators who successively occupy the same plot. Bebe, also meaning “to fall to the ground (e.g., of a person knocked down),” refers to birds alighting on the ground – in contrast to ko’a, which means “alighting in a tree, on a branch.”2 403. Ground-dove and (Spotted) dove up in the hills, Zéle wolo muke ne’e kolo. See No. 357 404. (Spotted) dove coos from up on the volcano, sees Job’s tears of people on the hillsides of Geo Kolo ku zéle mai lobo, tei ke’o ko’o ata lebi Geo A woman trying vainly to attract a man Exemplifying the genre called pata néke, teasing allusions directed to members of the opposite sex, the phrases are heard in planting songs. Nage identify the dove as a metaphorical reference to a woman, and Job’s tears as a man or men she is trying to attract. Geo (a region to the northeast of central Nage) appears to be motivated only by its rhyming with ke’o. Pronounced similarly to English “coo,” Nage ku refers specifically to the calls of doves named kolo but has the further sense of “to express self-pity.” This second sense may be present in énga ku, a phrase referring to a public announcement (énga is “to call summon”) typically made from an elevated location – thus sometimes

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

231

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 232

glossed as “calling from the mountain” – and declaring one’s troubles or making a complaint. The possible relevance of this practice to the present expression is indicated by the dove “cooing” (or calling) “from up on the volcano.” However, ku in énga ku is also interpreted as referring to the group of people, the masses as it were, to whom the announcement is addressed. 405. Dove that urges on friends, Kolo ta’a ‘isi moko. See Quail that invites others along (No. 393) 406. Weeping like a dove cooing Nangi bhia kolo ku To cry over, bemoan a (material) loss; to engage in self pity The phrase specifically describes someone bemoaning a loss of goods, or livestock that have died or been stolen, or being short of food owing to crop failure, and not, for example, the loss of a relative who has died. 407. Dove coconut Nio kolo A kind of coconut palm Contrasting with “buffalo coconut” (No. 25; see Figure 2) and other varieties, the palm is so named, according to Nage, because the nut is smaller than other coconuts, just as these small doves are smaller than other Columbiformes and other creatures generally. 408. Dove droppings Ta’i kolo A kind of cosh used in pugilistic competitions (etu) Made of buffalo hide wrapped in black palm fibre and light-coloured twine, the elliptical implements, in central Nage more often named named kepo (a term also meaning “[to make a] fist”) are held in the hand and used to strike opponents (see figure 26). Nage disagreed about the possible motivation: some thought it might reflect a similarity of colour between the cosh and bird droppings, others mentioned a similarity of shape. In either case, kolo in this context may have the more general sense of “bird.”

232

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 233

Figure 26 “Dove droppings” (No. 408)

STUBTAIL Russet-capped stubtail (or tesia) • Tesia everetti • BAMA or BAMA CEA 409. Stubtail does not want to address (someone), Ana bama bhia mega. See Fantail is present at noontide (No. 333) 410. Stubtail’s arse Bui bama A house floor that slopes slightly towards the front of the building

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

233

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 234

This is the preferred disposition among Nage and the opposite of the arrangement called “perching like a kingfisher” (No. 376). That the little bird serves as the model reflects the Nage claim that, apart from being “tailless” (the bird in fact has a very short tail), the stubtail commonly perches and flies with its head – in the metaphor corresponding to the front of a house – held slightly lower than its rear (Forth 2017a).

SUNBIRD • Nectarinia spp. • TIWE or TIWE TE’A 411. One-eyed sunbird Tiwe mata gibe A young woman ambivalent about a man’s advances Sunbirds are the smallest birds known to Nage. Tiwe includes the Olivebacked sunbird N. jugularis and the Flame-breasted sunbird N. solaris. Besides “one-eyed” – in the sense of having one eye damaged or missing – gibe also refers to having an eye closed, for example from dried eye rheum, and more generally to impaired vision. The metaphor occurs in a song performed by males teasing (néke) females that describes the “sunbird” (the woman) as sitting in a tree (a dwelling that the man wishes to enter) but being overcome by smoke (understood as false flattery) and therefore alternatively opening and closing her eyes, interpreted in this context as an expression of ambivalence. Although most Nage I questioned rejected it, I am still not certain that a previous interpretation of “one-eyed sunbird” as a more specific reference to the female genitalia (Forth 2004a, 194) – described as alternately responsive and unresponsive to a man endeavouring to “gain entry” – is entirely mistaken. 412. Sunbirds throng, friarbirds squabble Tiwe mole, koka sowa People enjoying an abundance of palm juice Like friarbirds, sunbirds are nectar feeders. The phrase is one of several that complement “deer bathe” (No. 163) in rites associated with the tapping of Arenga palms and expresses the desire that palms produce an abundance of palm juice – so much that both sorts of birds will be attracted in large num-

234

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 235

bers. Sunbirds are then envisioned as swarming over the juice and friarbirds, as is their wont, as squabbling noisily over the bonanza. The sunbird and the friarbird are further associated in an origin myth, where the small but plucky sunbird rescues the friarbird after the larger bird is captured by his opponent, the Imperial pigeon (Forth 2004a, 127; Forth 2007b, 505–6). The sunbird’s association with the Arenga palm also informs a Nage story (Forth 2004a, 150) recounting how people first discovered sweettasting toddy and began tapping palms after a large bamboo, swaying in the wind, accidently rubbed against an Arenga palm stalk growing close by. Soon afterwards a sunbird dropped blossoms from the ko’u tree (possibly Melochia umbellata), a fermenting agent, into a container full of the juice.

SWALLOWS and SWIFTS • Hirundidae and Apodidae • EBU TITU 413. Swallows and swifts command the months (seasons); Swallows and swifts wander the sky Ebu titu watu wula; Ebu titu leo lizu The wet season is approaching, the rains are near The two expressions are metaphorically synonymous. Ebu titu equally designates swallows and swifts, birds that, although belonging to different ornithological families, are similar in form and behaviour, a product of convergent evolution. Lyrics in songs, including planting songs, the present phrase refers to the birds’ significance as signs of rain, owing to the regular appearance of flights of swifts and swallows towards the end of the dry season. For the same reason, the birds are alternatively named awe uza, “rain summoner,” or ana uza, “rain creature,” and songs mentioning the birds additionally refer to the sounds of distant thunder, expressed metaphorically as “a young horse beating the drum” (No. 59) and “Mother Red striking the gong.” (“Mother Red” is a synonym of “Mother Géna,” a female personification of rain.) “Commands the months” implies that, by signalling the approach or beginning of the rainy season – the northwest monsoon lasting from October or November to April or May in Nage country – the birds determine the course of the year and the division of wet and dry months.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

235

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 236

UNIDENTIFIED BIRDS 414. A large hawk Wole wa A person holding the arms perpendicular to the body (especially when dancing) Translating as “plays with (the) wind,” as a bird name wole wa may be synonymous with jata jawa (see No. 377). “To dance like (a) wole wa” describes a method of dancing with the arms outstretched like a hovering raptor. 415. A small bird Witu tui Someone who is excessively nervous or unbalanced; boisterous and unruly young children Referring in part to people who act “crazy” (bingu or bingu titu), the metaphor reflects the Nage idea that birds onomatopoically named witu tui – possibly the great tit Parus major or a brush cuckoo – pick up human head hair, either clippings or strands of combed hair, to take to their nests or otherwise to the tops of tall trees, and that this causes the hair’s owner to become mentally deranged (Forth 2004a,102–3). Children behaving “wildly” are likely to be described as “like ana witu tui,” where ana can be understood either as a specific reference to children or to the bird’s small size. As a reference to derangement, the metaphor may recall English “cuckoo” in the sense of “foolish, demented, or insane” (Palmatier 1995, 105), and it is therefore worth noting that, according to some evidence, witu tui may partly denote a cuckoo of the genus Cacomantis (Forth 2004a, 129; also Coates and Bishop 1997, 348–9, who list both C. variolosus and C. sepuclaris as species present on Flores). As Cacomantis species, like other cuckoos, are brood parasites that do not build nests, however, Nage claims about the nest-building habits of witu tui obviously do not match this possible ornithological identification.

236

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 237

WATERHEN White-breasted waterhen • Amaurornis phoenicurus • KUKU RAKU The waterhen is a rail, a water bird with long spindly legs and large feet that produces a series of noisy vocalizations (see figure 27). Metaphorically, Nage employ the bird’s name, kuku raku, in two quite different ways, and I therefore treat these as two separate metaphors. Perhaps owing to its onomatopoeic quality, the name is regularly pronounced with the /r/, despite the general absence of this sound in the central Nage dialect. 416. White-breasted waterhen (1) Kuku raku A thin person with long legs; someone who is garrulous or complains loudly about things Although the bird also has very large feet, in addition to its cries it is the bird’s legs that have metaphorical value for Nage, who characterize people with large or wide feet as having “feet like a fan (or bellows).” An apt metaphor for a garrulous person, the bird’s loud and discordant vocalizations have been described as “a jumble of bubbling, chuckling, squabbling nasal screams and squeals; often uttered by more than one bird at the same time” (Coates and Bishop 1997, 280). As a reference to a thin, long-legged person, the metaphor is generally synonymous with usages employing herons and egrets (Nos. 358, 359). 417. White-breasted waterhen (2) Kuku raku People swarming, crowding around (a desired, object) Relating to human physical and vocal peculiarities, the first metaphorical use of kuku raku (No. 416) straightforwardly reflects distinctive physical features of the bird. While also alluding to the bird’s cries, this second usage is quite different. Several commentators independently analyzed it as follows: people swarming around something are described as waterhens because one of the bird’s distinctive cries sounds like gheo gheo gheo, and gheo is also a word meaning “to encircle” and “to swarm, throng, crowd around, overwhelm.”

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

237

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 238

Figure 27 Waterhen (No. 416)

(The full cry is replicated as gheo gheo gheo kuku raku kuku kuku raku.) As a verbal construct “(to act like) a waterhen” thus describes a number of people busily crowding around a person or place where consumables (food, tobacco) are on offer. This can be done with or without invitation. In the former instance, a person might say, for example, mai kita kuku raku (or bhia kuku raku), “let’s be like waterhens,” thereby encouraging others to share food from

238

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 239

a single plate or take cigarettes from a single packet. (In the second sense I have used the expression myself, when offering cigarettes to Nage associates.) On the other hand, when people take things uninvited or in a grasping manner, they may be admonished for “being like waterhens.” When I first encountered this interpretation, I was naturally sceptical, as it seemed fanciful and idiosyncratic. It is also one of the few metaphors in which an animal’s name can be understood as a verb (as in English “to rat on someone” or “to snake along,” said of a river or road). In fact, the interpretation appears to be widely known among Nage, and the metaphor is regularly employed in this way. However, some commentators suggested the usage – drawing on the homonymy of gheo – was a relatively recent innovation. One man in his late fifties who had spent several years in Java in the 1980s spontaneously stated that, before his departure, he had never heard “waterhen” (kuku raku) used in this way, whereas after his return he began hearing it often. Insofar as the metaphor refers to people taking things in an enthusiastic if not patently voracious or intemperate way, I once suggested that the usage might have been inspired by the similarity between the bird’s onomatopoeic name, kuku raku, and Indonesian kuku rakus, roughly “greedy, grasping fingernails, claws.” But although arguably bolstered by the Nage practice of deleting final consonants (like the /s/ in Indonesian rakus) when incorporating foreign elements into their own language, this hypothesis was not well received. As noted earlier, under the alternative name lako lizu (“sky dog,” No. 110), the cries of the waterhen function as a chronological sign, indicating the beginning of the rainy season (Forth 2004a, 12). However, this significance has no bearing on either of the metaphorical uses of kuku raku.

WHISTLER Bare-throated whistler • Pachycepala nudigula • KETE DHÉNGI 418. Little whistler half-way up the mountain Ana kete dhéngi zéle [or ena] kisa kéli A mistreated child The Bare-throated whistler is a songbird of high altitudes with a melodious and varied vocal repertoire. Occurring in song, this expression and variants

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

239

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 240

draw on a story describing the origin of the whistler, a bird that Nage say is heard but never seen. In the narrative, the bird derives from a little girl who is mistreated by her mother on a cold rainy night and who, to escape her cruel parent, turns into a whistler and flies to the higher slopes of the volcano Ebu Lobo. At least two empirical features of the species inform these ideas. First, the bird is an extraordinary songster and a superb mimic, and its song is indeed heard far more often than the bird itself is seen. Second, the bird inhabits high mountainous regions where, by Nage standards, the air is cold and damp. Consistent with its identification with a mistreated child, the whistler is further associated with aborted foetuses and the souls of deceased infants, which Nage say transform into these birds (Forth 2004a, 87–9, 151). The theme of children or adults being transformed into animals as a result of physical mistreatment is common in Indonesian origin myths, and the story of the whistler has been analyzed in this comparative context in Forth (2007c). Comparative Remarks on the Metaphorical Value of Different Birds and Bird Names As noted earlier, Nage employ forty-nine, or 68 percent, of their bird categories as metaphors. The product is 178 metaphorical expressions, a total second only to mammals. This relative prominence of birds reflects the relative complexity of Nage bird classification and the extent of their knowledge of birds. Most Nage can thus describe and identify dozens of birds by name, with some distinguishing over sixty – a figure that would seem impressive by the standards of anglophone folk ornithology. On the other hand, a comprehensive dictionary of English animal metaphors (Palmatier 1995) records expressions incorporating forty-two bird names, all of which, with the exception of “bird,” correspond to folk-generic categories in anglophone folk taxonomy (e.g., buzzard, chicken, eagle, lark),3 and this number falls not far short of the Nage total. However, some birds in the English list are exotics (e.g., albatross, dodo, parrot, peacock) whereas all Nage birds are local kinds. In addition, several birds Palmatier lists – although not necessarily the metaphors in which they occur – are probably unknown to many Englishspeakers (e.g., booby, catbird, and rook). So there can be little question that, by comparison to most anglophones, Nage possess a greater knowledge of

240

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 241

the birds they employ metaphorically, a circumstance consistent with their apparently greater ability to provide substantial interpretations. Of the twenty-three bird categories that do not occur in any Nage metaphors, two are folk-specifics (kolo dhoro, o ae bha) whose referents are implicitly subsumed by the corresponding folk-generics (see kolo, Nos. 401– 8, and o ae, No. 359) while another ten comprise birds that are unfamiliar to most Nage. But lack of familiarity may not be the only factor, and other reasons for their non-occurrence may lie in the character of the names themselves. Of the forty-nine metaphorical kinds, twenty-three are named monomially (i.e., with single lexemes or “words,” e.g., koka, “friarbird”) while another six designated with binomial names are employed metaphorically only with the short form of the name.4 For example, none of the seven cockatoo metaphors employ the bird’s complete name (kaka kea) but instead either kea or kaka or dialectal forms of these (kéka, kéra). Similarly, the bushchat, completely known as tute péla, occurs in metaphors only under the short form of the name, tute – as do the stubtail (bama or bama cea), oriole (leo or leo te’a), sunbird (tiwe or tiwe te’a), and eagle (kua or kua méze). Other names cannot be shortened without a loss of meaning (e.g., kaka daza, “dollarbird,” cannot be abbreviated as kaka since this always refers to the cockatoo). Including monomial forms of binomials, monomial names account for nearly 60 percent of metaphorical categories, whereas of the twenty-three birds that do not occur in metaphor, just nine (or 39 percent) are designated monomially. In addition, the fourteen binomially named categories include six of the ten unfamiliar birds. Of course, some binomially named birds do occur in metaphors. For example, the Channel-billed cuckoo (muta me) appears in as many as five. Yet such relatively long and complex names, many of which themselves have analyzable meanings (referring to appearance, behaviour, and so on), are evidently less favoured in conventional metaphor, and this likely reflects some combination of syntactical, prosodic, and semantic factors. All named with monomials and all comprising relatively common and distinctive species, the absence of five other kinds from Nage bird metaphors is less easily explained. These include the Sunda pygmy woodpecker (detu, also detu dalu), Great-billed parrot (feni), Savannah nightjar (leba), cuckoo-dove (‘owa), and a rail (wi).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

241

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 242

The Chestnut-backed thrush, papa or ana papa, is also not used metaphorically; however, most central Nage became familiar with the species only in the 1990s, when trappers began catching the birds for commercial sale, and before this time papa (a word also meaning “side” and denoting a reciprocal relationship or action) was mostly unknown as the name of a bird.

242

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 243

6 Other Non-Mammals in Metaphor: Snakes, Lizards, Fish, Frogs, and More Reviewing seventy-three expressions, the present chapter describes all remaining Nage metaphors incorporating vertebrates, thus reptiles, frogs (the only amphibians present on Flores Island), and fish. These include twentythree animal categories, all except three of which are folk-generics. One exception is tu gea, “bullfrog,” a folk-specific included in the generic category “frog” (pake). The other two are the life form categories “snake” (nipa) and “fish” (ika). (As discussed in Forth 2016, three categories of gobies – ana bo, kaka watu, and tebhu teke – as well as fish fry [ipu], all of which Nage employ metaphorically, function in their folk taxonomy as folk-generics.) The categories are dealt with in the same order followed in Forth (2016). Of the seventy-three metaphors, the largest number, twenty-two (30 percent), employ snakes, but lizards come a close second, with nineteen metaphors. Moreover, if the five crocodile metaphors were included with the three named sorts of lizards – a recourse not without herpetological merit – then these would outnumber the snakes. “Snake” (nipa) and “fish” (ika) are the only Nage life forms named with single lexemes (or monomials), a circumstance that facilitates the use of both terms as metaphors. At the same time, the monomial character of the folk-taxonomic names is consistent with the fact that both snakes and fish are physically and behaviourally so similar among themselves, especially in comparison to mammals and birds, and moreover so distinct from other animals. Besides “snake,” Nage metaphors incorporate six more specific snake categories (folk-generics), thus making a total of seven. Palmatier’s (1995) English listings are generally comparable: he records six snake categories (including

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 244

English “snake”), although two of these – “rattlesnake” and “viper” – are according to Palmatier’s interpretations metaphorically synonymous with “snake.” And while Nage employ three lizard categories as metaphors, or four including the crocodile, Palmatier records two (“lizard” and “chameleon”) in addition to “alligator” and “crocodile.” Usages incorporating fish and amphibians in the two languages are less comparable owing to more pronounced zoogeographical differences between eastern Indonesia and English-speaking countries, at least those in the northern hemisphere.

SNAKES 419. Hair that looks like it has been licked by a snake Fu bhia nipa semo Long, straight, and glossy female head hair Considered a mark of beauty, the expression refers especially to the hair of a young woman. Here translated as “to lick,” semo specifically describes the habit of snakes salivating on prey to make it easier to swallow. 420. Snake coiled in a hole Nipa woe lia An inactive, passive, or lazy person As Nage commentators pointed out, snakes coil up in holes in order to sleep and usually uncoil and become active only when they need to go in search of prey. There seems to be little difference between the referent of this metaphor and “snake in an orchard” (No. 422), although serpents inhabiting shady orchards are often encountered coiled and sleeping on vegetation rather than in holes. 421. Snake in a hole, white (or pale) bronzeback Nipa lia, gala bha A person of lower status (including a child) who does not defer to superiors Gala is the snake Dendrelaphis pictus inornatus, the Painted bronzeback. The interpretation of the expression is contested. Mostly employed as a depreca-

244

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 245

tion, the metaphor is by no means always applied to someone who is actually of lower status – as, for example, is a child or adolescent. In a more specific usage, a person can curse another by declaring “you should die like a snake in a hole, a pale bronzeback,” meaning, in part, away from home and without the company of family. As a snake in a hole (in the ground or a rock crevice) is normally more lowly positioned than a snake on the ground or in a tree, however, the image provides a suitable metaphor for a person of low status. So too may “pale bronzeback” insofar as it is the underside of a gala snake that is lighter-coloured, as is the underside of other snakes; hence the focus of this particular phrase may alternatively fall on the belly of the snake contrasting to its darker ventral surface rather than on the relative position of holes typically occupied by snakes. In several respects, the Nage usage recalls the English metaphor “lower than a snake’s belly,” referring to a person who is judged “totally contemptible” or “totally humiliated” (Palmatier 1995, 246). Nage often construe the expression as synonymous with “a red monkey, white gala snake” (No. 235), another phrase usually uttered in anger and directed towards children. Especially with regard to “snake in a hole,” alternative interpretations included a person who lives alone outside of a village (e.g., in a field hut, cf. No. 487) and someone who is bold and aggressive only within his or her home village and never outside. Both behaviours are disapproved by Nage, so in this respect the expression conveys a similar insult. Although most Nage understand “snake in a hole” (nipa lia) as the correct version of the expression, two regular informants insisted this was nipa ‘ia, “snake under an upright stone.” Nevertheless, neither could explain the sense of this phrase. ‘Ia denotes ritually significant stones erected inside villages, but I have never heard of any particular association of such stones with snakes. 422. Snake in an orchard Nipa napu A quiet, inactive, or lethargic person or someone who rarely leaves home The usage seems not to be well known in central Nage. Denoting specific locations planted with fruit-bearing and other useful trees, napu (“orchard,” “grove,” “plantation”) are shady places full of insects and other food for snakes, where, requiring little effort to obtain food, the creatures can remain

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

245

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 246

for long periods, coiled and largely motionless. Rather like English “lounge lizard,” to which it arguably bears some semantic resemblance, nipa napu (“orchard snake”) is not a folk-taxonomic name for any particular kind of snake and occurs only as a metaphor. 423. Snake obstructing a path Nipa baga zala A person who gets in the way Sometimes simply expressed as “like a snake” (bhia ko’o nipa), the phrase can refer, for example, to children who fall asleep or nap on the front gallery of a house, thus obstructing adults engaged in some activity there and needing to step over them. But it can apply to anyone who physically gets in the way of others. In ritual address to spirits, Nage use fata baga zala, “dead wood lying across a path,” to refer to problems or difficulties that hinder people in life’s general course or in the context of particular activities people wish to see to a successful conclusion, but “snake obstructing a path” seems not to be employed in this more abstract way. 424. Snake shedding its skin Nipa lo huwa A person whose clothes fall off or become loose The metaphorical referent of “skin” (huwa) in this expression is usually a waistcloth or sarong, a tubular garment that serves as the basic article of clothing for both men and women and can occasionally come loose or fall down when a person gets up from sitting or reclining. The phrase is uttered mostly in friendly banter among men, though women told me they also use it with reference to both males and females, and to both adults and children. 425. Snake that invades a rat’s hole (nest) Nipa ta’a ‘e lia dhéke A more powerful person who usurps someone less powerful The metaphor turns on the fact that both rats or mice (dhéke) and snakes characteristically occupy and nest in holes. Hence, by analogy, the phrase describes someone who successfully takes over a position or land or other

246

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 247

property that rightfully belongs to a person who is metaphorically smaller and weaker. 426. Two-headed snake Nipa ulu pali A duplicitous person whose intentions are unclear and cannot be trusted The term is also the folk-taxonomic name of the Island pipe snake Cylindrophis opisthorhodus, a species whose tail resembles its head and that raises its tail when retreating from a threat, thereby giving the impression of a snake moving backwards. Nage commonly describe the snake as not only possessing two heads but also as being capable of moving – or going “forward” – in two opposite directions so that the creature’s actual direction of travel is ambiguous. Accordingly, a person described as a “two-headed snake” is someone who may say one thing to one person and something completely different to another, especially in order to advance his or her own interests, gain an opportunity, or stir up trouble. The usage will likely recall the English metaphor “speaking with a forked tongue,” which of course alludes to snakes in general. As shown below, however, the English expression is more exactly replicated in Nage metaphors employing the monitor lizard (Nos. 446 and 443). As not all Nage regard the pipe snake as actually possessing two heads, the metaphor is grounded in an idea that some Nage would dispute. Nevertheless, the representation is rehearsed sufficiently often to maintain the metaphor, which of course derives further support from the animal’s name. (In Malay, another species of Cylindrophis is identically named ular kepala dua, “two-headed snake.”) 427. Ascending snakes Nipa nai A kind of shrub or flowering plant The plant is apparently so named because its stem and leaves are described as slippery, like a snake. Reflecting this property, the leaves are boiled to produce a decoction given to women in labour to ensure a quick and easy delivery. However, “ascending snakes” also describes the consequence of burning driftwood inside a house, a prohibited practice claimed to result in snakes, cockroaches, and perhaps other insects entering a dwelling. For the

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

247

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 248

same reason, Nage are averse to burning this plant as well, although “ascending snakes wood” (kaju nipa nai) seems more often to refer to the wood of trees washed up in a flood. For different dialects of Ngadha and Endenese, Verheijen (1990, 34, 54) lists “ascending snakes” as the name of plants in the genera Pouzolzia, Euodia, or Leea. 428. Snake tuber Uwi nipa A kind of wild tuber The tuber is named with reference to its long, thin shape, having the same thickness from top to bottom, or, as this was once expressed, having a long root and a small “head,” and thus resembling a snake. Informants disagreed about whether it was edible. 429. Growing (ascending) snake Nipa tebu The rainbow Nage have no other term for “rainbow.” As tebu refers to growth, especially in plants, it may seem curious that the Nage imagery involves a snake descending to drink at a water source (thus head first), an idea also suggested by a Lio and Endenese term for rainbows, nipa moa, “thirsty snake.” On the other hand, no one claims ever to have seen this, and all Nage I questioned described “growing snake” merely as a “way of speaking” (bholo ‘ana). An association of rainbows and snakes is general in Indonesia and also occurs in other parts of the world, for example, in the Australian Aboriginal figure of the “rainbow serpent.” In Nage and elsewhere, representing the meteorological phenomenon as a serpent is presumably facilitated by a rainbow’s long and thin shape and multicoloured stripes. Paralleling a widespread Indonesian idea specifying rainbows as precursors of illness or affliction in humans or livestock (Bader 1971; Barnes 1973), Nage claim that a rainbow can suck the blood of people of high rank (Forth 1998, 95), and they warn children against pointing at rainbows lest their fingers become bent. Nipa tebu (“growing snake”) also appears in the longer phrase nipa tebu uza leza, (where uza leza means “sunshine rain”), referring to the fact that rainbows are commonly seen when the sun shines through falling rain or drizzle.

248

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 249

430. Character of a Russell’s viper Waka ba A bold, aggressive person who inspires fear in others Ba is the name of Russell’s viper Daboia russelii limitis, a highly venomous snake that Nage speak of with fear and loathing. As they remark, encountering the viper immediately causes the body hair to stand on end, even in people subsequently able to muster the courage to kill the snake. People’s reaction to someone with “the character of a viper,” typically a man, is similarly visceral. Usually translated with Indonesian wibawa, “power, authority; bearing” and pengaruh, “influence (on others),” waka has two apparently related senses. First, it refers to the human forehead, or more specifically the middle of the forehead just below the hairline. Second, and as in the present expression, the term denotes a personal inner strength, a sort of force of character or masterfulness manifest in interpersonal dealings, which some people possess and others do not – or do so in a lower degree (see the similar sounding waka bha, “white, light-coloured waka,” the quality of a quiet, easily intimidated person who is unable, for example, to respond when spoken to in a harsh manner). As waka denotes a quality normally attributed only to humans, its application to a snake is itself metaphorical, and the metaphor draws primarily on a similarity between the typical human reaction to the snake and an unmediated experience of certain aggressive, powerful individuals. 431. False viper Lola ba The mock viper This is the folk taxonomic name of the Common mock viper Psammodynastes pulverulentus, not an actual viper but a harmless snake Nage recognize as resembling the deadly Russell’s viper (ba). Apart from similar colouring, the snake adopts a viper-like pose when threatened. The precise meaning of lola is uncertain, but the gloss “false” fits Nage explanations of the name, which obviously has the same motivation as English “mock viper.”

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

249

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 250

432. Viper gourd Hea ba A variety of gourd or pumpkin The gourd is so named because the skin has markings like the Russell’s viper. 433. Viper tree, viper wood Kaju ba A kind of tree Used for timber, in context the tree is also called simply ba (see ba dheo, a reference to buildings made of ba and dheo wood). The species is so named because the bark of the tree and the grain of the wood resemble patterning on the skin of the Russell’s viper (see Figure 28). Given the Nage abhorrence of this snake, it is somewhat remarkable that the wood is used in house construction, especially in view of the taboo on driftwood (see No. 427). 434. Bronzeback Gala A person or animal that moves swiftly or does something quickly A long, thin, non-venomous and fairly common snake, Painted bronzebacks are the fastest snakes known to Nage, and suddenly coming across one moving rapidly in the forest or across a path can be very startling. Nage say the snake can move with such speed and force that it can puncture dry vegetation such as bamboo sheaths, and for this reason, and because of the shock it can cause, travellers refer to the snake, euphemistically, as the “spirits’ blowgun” (supi nitu, Forth 2016, 202). The only other snakes to which Nage apply euphemisms are poisonous kinds. Qualities metaphorically represented by the gala snake can be positive or negative. Apart from the several more specific usages listed below, I recorded “like a bronzeback” (bhia gala), describing a person who acts with speed or quickly completes a task; “having a bronzeback’s body” (weki gala), describing human agility as well as speed; and “horse like a bronzeback” (ja sama gala) referring to a swift horse (ja). As regards the last expression, a magical use of the desiccated tail of a bronzeback in horse-racing magic is noteworthy (Forth 2016, 202).

250

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 251

Figure 28 Viper tree (No. 433)

435. Bronzeback’s tongue Lema gala A person who talks too much; a skilled speaker; a persuasive person, a fast or smooth talker The metaphor has nothing to do with forked tongues (as in the English idiom), which of course are characteristic of all snakes. Commentators offered several reasons the bronzeback in particular serves as the vehicle in this expression, including the idea that bronzeback tongues are (proportionally) longer than those of other snakes and dart in and out of the mouth more rapidly and more continually. Perhaps also relevant is the bronzeback’s reported use of its tongue to catch insect prey, especially if this common snake is observed to do so more regularly than other kinds of snakes. 436. Bronzeback whose tail alone remains Gala geze bholo ta’a éko (or ko’o éko) A person who is quick off the mark or in a great hurry

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

251

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 252

The phrase can be abbreviated as gala bholo éko (“bronzeback [with] only the tail [not moving]”), but the notion of “remaining (in place)” expressed by geze (“not yet, temporarily”) is implicit in both versions. As the fastest of snakes, Nage describe bronzebacks as moving so rapidly that, when awakened from sleep, their head and body will already be in motion while the tail remains coiled. How far this might be a deliberate exaggeration is unclear, but the apparent speed of the snakes, as I myself have witnessed, is certainly well founded, and the metaphor is in any case appropriate for a person who is faster than others to move into action. In a particularly cynical application, the phrase can refer to someone, especially a person not fond of work, who is always first to respond to a call to eat. In a more general vein, it can apply to anyone who is in too much of a hurry or who acts too hastily. 437. White (pale) bronzeback, Gala bha. See Snake in a hole (No. 421), Red monkey (No. 235) 438. Of the python tribe ‘Ili ko’o goka A greedy, voracious person Nage are familiar with two species of pythons (goka), Python reticulatus and P. timoriensis, which they distinguish as goka denu and goka leo. In this metaphor, the only one involving pythons, there is no indication that the vehicle is either kind in particular. “Clan” (woe or ‘ili woe) might be a more accurate translation of ‘ili, but “tribe” better expresses the sense in English. The metaphor turns on the fact that pythons swallow their food whole, consuming everything and leaving nothing behind. The metaphor may especially apply to avaricious people who covet other people’s possessions or who take the lion’s share of something, leaving little or nothing for others. Of course, other snakes also swallow food whole, but pythons are by far the largest of snakes and are known to Nage as swallowing relatively large animals, including young pigs. 439. Pit viper waiting for the stick, pit viper (should) expect to be struck Hiku napa bhole

252

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 253

A person who behaves recklessly in dealings with powerful people and so puts him- or herself in danger Hiku refers to the Island pit viper Cryptelytrops insularis (formerly Trimesurus albolabris), and the metaphor refers to someone who, in the common English idiom, is “asking for trouble.” As Nage explained, anyone encountering a pit viper, a venomous but usually unaggressive snake, should immediately grab a stick and strike it dead. In fact, Nage habitually kill all snakes, whether poisonous or not. But for obvious reasons they are especially assiduous when it comes to this very common species, so a pit viper should flee at the approach of a human, and especially one holding a stick. Napa, “to wait,” expresses a future state (see, e.g., napa poa, “in the morning, tomorrow morning”; and napa sa éno, “in a little while,” “presently”) and in the present expression suggests inevitability. Bhole can be translated either as “stick” or “to be struck, get the stick.” More elaborate variants recorded include ma’e kau bhia hiku napa bhole, “do not be like a viper waiting to be struck,” “do not put yourself in danger”; and imu bhia hiku napa bhole, “he is like a viper awaiting the stick,” “he is asking for trouble.” In Sikkanese (eastern Flores) apparently the same metaphor is translated as “pit viper that does not flee when about to be struck” (mea turung ‘oba; Pareira and Lewis 1998, 132). The metaphor is also known in the Keo region, immediately to the south of Nage (Tule 1998). 440. Rat Snake with red cheeks Sawa pipi to A person with a harsh manner or aggressive temperament to whom others acquiesce or follow out of fear Although applied to pythons in other Indonesian languages, sawa in Nage denotes the Indonesian rat snake Elaphe subradiata, a creature that, as its English name suggests, feeds mostly on rats and mice and is therefore frequently encountered inside houses and settlements. After first recording the phrase in the early 1990s, I long suspected it could be applied metaphorically to humans, but the only interpretation I ever obtained was that the expression described an especially aggressive snake that, moreover, did not actually have red cheeks. More recently, however, I recorded applications in the sense given

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

253

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 254

above, one by a man who assured me he had heard it used in the same way by his parents and grandparents (now all deceased). That the creature’s “red cheeks” are themselves metaphorical reveals a verbal identification of the colour red with anger that is found in various languages, including English (Kövecses 2010, 222).

LIZARDS Like many other languages, Nage has no general term for “lizard.” Nage distinguish five lizards by name: monitors (ghoa), skinks (mapa bonga), Tokay geckoes (teke), House lizards (or House geckoes, ana gu), and Flying lizards (kaka hika). Of these, two kinds – the House lizard and Flying lizard (Draco volans) – are not employed as metaphors, although both figure in other symbolic usages (Forth 2013). While the monitor lizard comes a close second, the species Nage most often employ as a metaphor is the Tokay gecko, a circumstance attributable to this relatively large lizard’s common occurrence inside buildings and its loud and distinctive call, a vocalization that has produced the onomatopoeic Nage name teke as well as Malay tokay and indeed English “gecko.” 441. Monitor lizard collecting black ants Ghoa dhaga mule A lazy person who expects to be fed by others The Water monitor Varanus salvator is by far the largest of the five kinds of lizards Nage distinguish by name. Although Tokay geckoes are occasionally consumed, the monitor is also the lizard most often hunted and eaten. Sometimes expressed as “having a mouth like a monitor lizard collecting ants” (wunu mumu bhia ghoa dhaga mule), the present metaphor turns on the behaviour of monitor lizards, which Nage describe as resting with their mouths open waiting for ants to enter. Dhaga means “to collect, accumulate,” as for example when youths go from house to house collecting rice for use in community-wide rituals. Like other monitor metaphors, the present expression implies a deceitful character since Nage describe ants that enter the lizard’s mouth as being fooled, thinking it is dead or sleeping. Mule refers specifically

254

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 255

to a kind of black ant, but it is unclear why this term should be used rather than metu, a more inclusive term for ants. 442. Monitor lizard tricks ants Ghoa ‘ole mule A person who ensnares other people As Nage commentary revealed, the imagery here, based on observation of monitor behaviour, is the same as that reflected in the previous metaphor (No. 441), although the local interpretation is different. 443. Monitor lizard that fools black ants with its bifurcate tongue Ghoa wole mule lema sanga dhua A person who misleads others with dishonest talk The expression combines two separate metaphors, “a monitor’s tongue” and “a monitor collecting ants” (Nos. 446 and 441). Wole, “to fool, trick,” is a variant of ‘ole. The metaphor is evidently motivated in part by the fact that the monitor deceives ants with its tongue, the same body part used by the human referent to deceive other people. 444. Monitor lizard’s footprints Pala ghoa Someone who misleads, sets a false trail Like virtually all monitor metaphors, this refers to a dishonest or deceitful person. More specific versions include: “do not be like a monitor’s tracks” (ma’e bhia pala ghoa) and “do not follow (believe) people who are like a monitor’s limbs” (ma’e dhéko bhia lima ghoa). Nage describe monitors’ feet as “turned the wrong way” (bhale sala) or “towards the back” (pago logo) so that their tracks can fool hunters. Although Nage sometimes speak as though monitors have fully inverted feet, this should be understood as a hyperbole, and a morphological basis for the idea can found in the way the lizard’s back feet, especially, often appear to point outwards from the body or even backwards. In addition, when Water monitors move, they place the “tarsal part of the foot on the ground first … [twisting] it as the body moves forward

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

255

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 256

and then [stamping] the toes on the ground, resulting in a (kind of) inverted footprint” (C. Ciofi pers. comm., cited in Forth 2013). Despite its apparently fantastic ring, therefore, both the notion that monitors have inverted feet and the derived metaphor have an obvious basis in empirical observation. 445. Monitor lizard’s penis Lasu ghoa A man who engages in indiscriminate sex Like male snakes, male monitor lizards possess hemipenes, bifurcate intromittent organs that allow them to mount females from either the left or right. The metaphor refers more specifically to a man who has intercourse both with women who are permitted as sexual (and marital) partners and women who are not. 446. Monitor lizard’s tongue Lema ghoa A person who says one thing on one occasion and something different on another, or someone who speaks dishonestly Unlike other lizards, monitor tongues are forked, like those of snakes. The metaphor is therefore comparable to “two-headed snake” (No. 426) and even more similar to English “speaking with a forked tongue.” A dishonest person can be more explicitly described as “having a tongue is like a monitor’s tongue” (lema kau bhia ko’o lema ghoa). 447. Skin like a monitor lizard Hu’i weki bhia ko’o ghoa A person (usually a man) with hard and rough skin An alternative expression is “back like a monitor” (logo bhia ghoa). Motivated simply by the quality of the lizard’s skin, the expression applies to shirtless men who labour in the sun as well as to people with a skin condition or people who do not bathe or have not bathed and whose skin is caked in dirt – thus replicating the mottled skin of the monitor. Hu’i weki translates literally as “skin of the body.”

256

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 257

448. Child of a skink Ana mapa bonga (or ana ko’o mapa bonga) A person whose paternity is unknown or who will not reveal his or her paternity Skinks are lizards composing the large and diverse herpetological family Scincidae, and comprise small to medium-sized lizards often encountered in or near Nage settlements. Calling someone “child of a skink” is based on a belief, found among Nage as among other eastern Indonesians, according to which skinks are able to impregnate female domestic pigs (Forth 2016, 298– 300). Piglets thus fathered are recognized by striping on the pelage similar to that found on the Many-lined skink Mabuya multifasciata, the most common referent of mapa bonga (ana is “child”), and moreover on infant wild pigs, ana wawi witu – a metaphor (No. 120) that, significantly, has much the same referent as “child of a skink.” 449. Skink pleads for help Mapa soba loa A person who claims great need and continually requests assistance from others The expression is mostly used for a person who persistently asks for something, thus becoming troublesome and annoying. Although some were uncertain of the referent, in the view of most Nage mapa is to be understood as a short form of the name mapa bonga, “skink.” It is also relevant that a minority regard mapa and bonga as names for two separate though similar kinds of lizards, while in some parts of the Keo region, mapa alone is the name for all skinks. The term loa means “to spill over, overflow, go beyond the bounds.” Soba can mean “to plead, earnestly request,” “claim to be in need,” “admit defeat,” or “to sigh, moan” (cf. soba mata, “to know that one will die,” “to bemoan one’s impending death”) and may be cognate with Ngadha and Lio soba, “to try, test” (Arndt 1961; Arndt 1933; cf. Indonesian coba, in the same senses). Only one commentator offered an interpretation of how the metaphor reflected the behaviour of skinks, claiming that in the Geo region, from where his wife derives, loa is hoa, a term referring to dry fallen leaves, and

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

257

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 258

that, accordingly, soba hoa (and thus soba loa) means “to get help from leaves.” He then explained that the phrase refers to skinks foraging on the ground after sunrise and every now and again ducking under large fallen leaves to protect themselves from predators. However, the informant also asserted that the usage referred not so much to someone who is in need as to a person who keeps stopping work in order to take a rest, talk to people, and so on. While this may sound rather unlikely, it should be noted that the man provided exactly the same exegesis when I questioned him again two years after our first conversation. 450. Skink’s mouth Mumu mapa A forest vine In one opinion the plant is so named because the edible fruits of the vine somehow resemble the mouth (mumu) of a skink, but other people I asked were uncertain whether mapa in this context referred to the lizard. For So’a, Verheijen (1990, 33) lists mumu mapa as Cynanchum, a genus of vines. 451. Biting like a Tokay gecko Kiki bhia teke (or Bhia kiki teke) A person who bites another in a fight; someone who holds onto something and will not let go Nage know geckoes for their powerful bite and ability to grip firmly with their strong teeth and jaws. Fights between spouses as well as fights between men or women can involve biting. Discussing this metaphor, one man mentioned how, when he was young, his mother once bit his father in the thigh and how the limb became so swollen that he was immobilized for a month. In the second sense another commentator suggested that the phrase could be used for a stingy person, a sense also covered by an invertebrate metaphor (No. 501). 452. Eyeballs like gecko’s eggs Ana mata bhia telo teke A person with round, bulging eyes or someone who stares wide-eyed

258

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 259

Tokay gecko’s eggs are white and round and not much smaller than human eyeballs. 453. Gecko at the top of a dalu tree that is difficult to climb Teke tolo dalu gho ghedo pau A person who makes a great effort but is frustrated and unable to advance Nage describe the trunks of dalu trees (Albizia sp.) as slippery and having loose bark, thus making climbing difficult, so the expression depicts a lizard in a tree that is unable either to climb further up or come down. It provides yet another instance of a circle-dance lyric in which singers tease or deride (néke) members of the opposite sex. According to one interpretation, the metaphor refers to a man unsuccessfully climbing a house post in an attempt to enter the dwelling of an unmarried woman, whereas from a male perspective it suggests a woman who is unable to draw the attention of a man. 454. Gecko high in a banyan tree cries in lamentation Teke tolo nunu polu kasi ku A person lamenting, or who bemoans his or her lot, or otherwise speaks in a sorrowful or melancholic voice Also expressed as teke hodo nunu (hodo, tree cavity), the metaphor occurs in songs accompanying circle-dancing. Nage remarked how the phrase, like others in this genre, causes people to remember spouses and kin who have died. Tokay geckoes are commonly found in banyan trees, whose cavities may house numerous geckoes. One commentator noted how these cavities are narrow, restricted places, so that the metaphor could be understood as an allusion to limitations imposed by ill fortune. In the same connection, another man stated that vocalizations of Tokay geckoes occupying banyans differ from such geckoes heard inside houses. Although the gecko’s call, and especially the longer descending note that completes a series of cries, might be experienced as melancholic, no one I questioned seemed to concur in this. The onomatopoeic name of the lizard, teke, also means “circle-dance,” but this is apparently a homonym reflecting a different root and has no definite connection with references to geckoes in circle-dance songs. In regard to the dance, in which performers move in a circle clinging on to one another’s

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

259

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 260

shoulders, the term probably derives from teke in the sense of “to hold (onto), grasp.” Interestingly, geckoes are known for their grasping ability (see No. 455), but the lizard’s name is sufficiently explained by onomatopoeia. 455. Hands (arms) of a Tokay gecko Lima teke A person who is agile, especially an experienced climber or a man skilled at grasping and holding onto things People thus spoken of can be described variously as “having arms like a gecko” or more simply “being like a gecko.” Like other Indonesian languages, Nage does not distinguish hands from arms, both of which they call lima. Denoting the arms and hands of humans, lima is also used for the corresponding parts of lizards. However, the metaphor is more specifically motivated by the adhesive pads on the gecko’s “hands” and feet, which allow the lizards to hold things firmly, climb vertical services with ease, and even walk upside down under tree branches or inside buildings. A special application of the metaphor dating from the colonial period, when the Dutch introduced Western ball games, is to someone skilled in catching and holding onto things thrown or kicked, such as a soccer ball. Accordingly, there is a notion that a person who wants to become a proficient goal-keeper should eat geckoes’ forelimbs, and Nage say of someone skilled in goal-keeping “you have eaten gecko arms” (kau pesa lima teke). But whether or how often this is actually done as a form of homeopathic magic is unclear. (By contrast, Nage do eat gecko flesh as a cure for respiratory ailments.) Where lima teke refers specifically to someone skilled in climbing trees, it is synonymous with “legs and arms of a monkey” (No. 216). 456. Male gecko Teke lalu A man whose wife is larger than him The metaphor is applied mainly in jest to husbands whose wives are fat or otherwise large-bodied. The usage was known only to two brothers who claimed to know about the relative size of male and female geckoes from observing mating pairs. The idea that male geckoes, like the males of some other

260

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 261

reptiles, are larger than the females appears quite widespread in central Flores (somewhat contrary to an earlier report, Forth 2013). The notion is not clearly grounded in herpetological fact. However, since the two brothers mentioned it independently of one another, there is no reason to suspect fabrication. In addition, a man from a closely neighbouring village also knew the expression, although he was unfamiliar with this interpretation. Even so, it seems to be a relatively “private metaphor” that, like a private joke, is current only within a small circle of people. 457. Tokay gecko’s teeth Ngi’i teke A person who is strong and resolute or tenacious; the nicked blade of a knife The metaphor derives from the firm bite of the Tokay gecko. Nage thus remark how snakes should be wary when attacking a gecko as the lizard can bite its attacker in the throat and not let go, thereby disabling and eventually killing the snake. They also say that when a Tokay gecko bites a person, the lizard must be killed in order to release its grip, and that when catching a gecko, one must grasp it by the back of the neck to avoid being bitten. According to an idea evidently less grounded in empirical observation, a gecko will let go only if it hears a thunder clap. In the same vein, rows of serrations called “gecko’s teeth,” customarily carved on sacrificial posts (peo) and decorated house posts, are described as symbols of strength, tenacity, and endurance. And similarly suggesting human tenacity is the expression “like the teeth of a gecko (that) never lets go” (bhia ngi’i teke ea talo). Alluding to the same resemblance with the saw-like teeth of geckoes, “a blade like gecko’s teeth” is one with a series of nicks that is much in need of sharpening. 458. Gecko goby Tebhu teke A kind of freshwater fish with a large head like that of a Tokay gecko This is another instance of a folk-taxonomic name incorporating the name of a quite different animal. Tebhu (or ana tebhu) denotes another kind of goby (Forth 2016, 212–13).

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

261

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 262

459. Gecko’s back Logo teke A growth stage of maize This applies when maize is nearly ripe and leaves enclosing the cobs are marked like the skin on a gecko’s back.

FISH 460. Fish in the boat Ika wawo kowa Something that is already accomplished or is already certain, a sure thing As Nage never fish from vessels, their territory containing no rivers or other bodies of water large enough to require or facilitate these, the present metaphor has evidently been adopted from some coastal region. Fish in the boat are of course fish that have already been caught, so the expression is comparable to English “bird in the hand” and “in the bag” – a phrase originally alluding to small game a hunter has killed and placed in a bag. Wawo kowa literally means “on top of the boat” but refers to the inside of a boat, conceived in relation to the water below. 461. Fish in water Ika one ae A person who moves about aimlessly or in an unpredictable manner The source of this metaphor is fish swimming hither and yon, moving in one direction for a short while before quickly changing course. In one instance, it was applied to groups of young men described disapprovingly as avoiding work and wandering about aimlessly. 462. Fish in water resting and pretending to be asleep Ika one ae ézu podi nade A person who appears to be inactive and not paying attention but, contrary to this impression, suddenly responds or takes action

262

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 263

The expression occurs in a song lyric. Although both nade and ézu mean “to sleep, be asleep,” the second term is the more common usage in dialects to the east and northeast of central Nage, and also in central Keo. Applied for example to a person who seems not to be listening to a discussion but then unexpectedly begins to participate, the metaphor turns on the image of a fish, motionless and seemingly asleep, that suddenly swims off. 463. Dolphin down by the coast Lobhu lau ma’u A person who is always disappearing and reappearing; an impotent man unable to maintain an erection Although dolphins are marine mammals, Nage loosely classify them as “fish” (ika). Less often rendered as “dolphin down in the sea” (lobhu lau mesi), or simply as “like a dolphin” (bhia ko’o lobhu), the metaphor reflects the animal’s habit of bounding out of the water and immediately submerging, only to emerge again. A common modern application, both in Nage and the Keo region (where I also recorded the metaphor), is to truant children who attend school irregularly. In reference to male impotence, “down by the coast” can partly be understood as an allusion to the lower part of the body and the genital region and, more specifically still, to the penis, which, like a dolphin, may rise up but in an impotent man quickly descends. Many central Nage are familiar with lobhu only as the name of a sea creature of a kind unknown. In fact, they are more familiar with dolphin flesh, occasionally sold in highland markets and said to taste like buffalo or deer. Evidently, then, the metaphor, although nowadays in wide use among Nage, ultimately derives from a coastal region. 464. Wanting (only) shark’s liver Mo’o ate iu (or hai wai ate iu) A person who is given something but demands something better Although very few Nage have tasted shark’s liver, some know its reputation as an extremely rich and tasty dish, an assessment shared by eastern Indonesian coastal peoples. From this derives the further expression “sweet (tasty, delicious) like a shark’s liver” (mi bhia ate iu) and, in regard to its richness, a

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

263

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 264

claim that a single small piece is a sufficient complement for a large plate of rice. One application of the metaphor is in describing or rebuking children who continually ask for things but are never satisfied with what they receive. Given the rarity of shark’s liver in central Nage, the phrase also implies an object that is extravagant and difficult to obtain. At the same time, sharks’ livers are not likely to be a food regularly consumed anywhere on Flores Island, so assuming that the metaphor derives from a coastal region, this implication would also be entailed in the metaphor as employed elsewhere. Shark’s liver plays a central role in an eastern Sumbanese version of a myth, widely known in eastern Indonesia, relating the origin of the dugong (Dugong dugon). In the Sumbanese tale, a man catches a shark and wants to reserve the liver for himself, but while he is absent, his wife cooks the liver and gives it to her hungry children. On returning home and discovering what has happened, the husband savagely beats the wife, who in order to bathe her wounds, enters the sea, and after remaining partly submerged for a time, gradually transforms into the sea mammal (Forth 1988). This version of the myth, however, seems to be unknown on Flores. 465. Goby in shallow water Ana bo ae ‘ete A person who is out of breath Since in most contexts Nage contrast gobies with “fish” (ika), the relationship between these freshwater fish and the more general category is rather complex (Forth 2016, 211–16), and I list this and the following two metaphors under “fish” simply as a matter of convenience. The commonest referent of the present expression is someone who tries to speak when exhausted and gasping for breath, so that his or her speech is faltering and unclear. It can also refer to people who open and close their mouths in response to food that is too hot or too spicy. Ana bo is another name for ana tebhu (Sicyopterus sp.), a freshwater goby. The metaphor draws on the image of weir fishing where, after fish and other creatures have entered, the weir is drained, thus leaving fish gasping for air and rapidly opening and closing their mouths. ‘Ete is “to drain,” “drained, dried up.”

264

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 265

466. Loach goby Kaka watu A small child who clings to his or her mother Consistent with the name kaka watu, meaning “sticks to rocks,” the Loach goby (Rhyacichthys aspro) is a fish with a flattened head and ventral mouth that attaches itself to stones at the bottom of rivers and streams using its broadened pelvic and pectoral fins as well as its head and snout (Larson 2011, 55). The behaviour thus provides an appropriate metaphor for a child who is too “clinging,” which is to say, too much attached to his or her mother. An apparent botanical equivalent is “fungus on dead wood” (ki’i tolo fata), although this can additionally refer to anyone who stays long in a single place. 467. Catching various things and coming across a Loach goby ‘A’i ‘a’i jeka ko’o kaka watu Someone who in the course of an activity encounters something positive and unexpected or requiring exceptional luck to obtain Nowadays, “luck” is usually expressed with the Indonesian term rejeki, “luck, good fortune,” rendered by Nage as reja ki. Nage say Loach gobies usually occur only in larger rivers and are extremely rare in smaller rivers or streams. The source of the metaphor is thus people fishing in small streams expecting to catch crustaceans, eels, or other gobies but, in addition or instead, catch a Loach goby. The idea that these gobies occur far less often in smaller streams than in larger rivers appears inconsistent with ichthyological evidence, according to which they live in very swift rocky streams (Larson 2011, 55). However, Larson also describes the fish as very difficult to catch, and it may be this, rather than their rarity in small streams, that accounts for the notion that catching one requires exceptionally good fortune. 468. Head like a gecko goby Ulu bhia ko’o tebhu teke A person with a disproportionately large head The goby’s large head resembles the head of a Tokay gecko. The metaphor thus compares a large-headed person to a large-headed fish (see No. 458), although it can also be used as a gratuitous or “friendly” insult.

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

265

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 266

469. Dense as fish fry in the estuary, Kapa bhia ipu lau nanga. See Numerous as black ants in the hills (No. 510) 470. Fish fry at one end of a pool sees many people and pretends to be crazy Ipu lau éko tiwu tei tei riwu imu rona podi bingu A person who sees members of the opposite sex and starts acting peculiarly in order to attract their attention Ipu denotes the fry of various freshwater fish that enter estuaries and ascend rivers in certain months of the year, when they are caught in great numbers.1 The expression is a lyric usually sung to accompany circle-dancing and, like others of this genre, is used to tease or deride (néke) people of the opposite sex. Commenting on rona, the dialectal form of central Nage ‘ona (“to make” or “cause”), Nage suggested the expression may derive from Réndu or Dhawe, both regions further seaward where ipu are more common. Riwu is similarly more often used than ‘iwu (“mass, many people”), thus once again illustrating a special occurrence of the /r/ that is not heard in everyday speech. Bingu can be understood as either “crazy, deranged” or “confused.” Ola can be inserted between rona and podi, thus producing rona ola podi bingu, which would translate as “to make an act of pretended craziness or derangement.” In any event, the expression conveys the sense of someone making a spectacle of him- or herself in order to gain attention. Why fish fry are employed in the metaphor no one could explain, but it could conceivably relate to the bustle caused by the appearance of fry in rivers and large numbers of people converging to harvest the swarming fish. 471. Fish fry have their pools, monkeys have their gathering places Ipu ne’e tiwu, ‘o’a ne’e loka People belonging to different communities have different customs Loka can refer to anywhere that monkeys gather but also to a gathering of monkeys, or a troop. Applied to humans, it denotes a location set aside for a particular activity or performance (e.g., loka to’a lako or loka mao, a hunting shrine; loka etu, a demarcated field where pugilistic competitions are held; loka tua, a palm gin distillery). Employed as a proverb, the parallelistic expression is comparable to Indonesian lain kolam, lain ikan, “different pools,

266

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 267

different fish,” and lain padang, lain belalang, “different fields, different grasshoppers.” It also recalls the American English “different strokes for different folks.” A prosodic influence is evident in the assonance of ipu (fry) and tiwu (pool) and ‘o’a (monkey) and loka (place).

EELS Nage do not classify eels as fish (ika). The two eel metaphors I recorded both focus on the slipperiness of eels. 472. Eel without slime Tuna ta’a una mona Someone without possibilities or whose situation is difficult, dire, or desperate Nage una is curious. While also designating rough, scaly, or blistered human skin (see logo una, “blistered back”), the term is related to words in other Malayo-Polynesian languages meaning “(fish) scale” (Blust and Trussel 2010), but the Nage term refers to slime, or specifically a layer of slime on an eel’s skin. As Nage recognize, unlike fish, eels do not have scales, and fish scales are in any case called by an unrelated word, dila. An eel’s slime, as commentators pointed out, is its primary means of protection, making it difficult for humans or other animals to catch and hold onto the creatures. Thus just as an eel without slime would be largely defenceless, so a person in a comparable state would be similarly powerless and vulnerable. Apart from people otherwise lacking in possibilities, Nage interpreted the metaphor as also referring to someone who strives but without result and so remains poor or otherwise deficient, and is therefore disregarded by others. 473. Slippery as an eel Ngélu bhia tuna A devious or treacherous person Nage ngélu, “slippery,” is metaphorically identical to the English word, as is the entire metaphor to English “slippery as an eel.” Indonesian licin similarly covers both meanings, being glossed by Echols and Shadily (1989) both as

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

267

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 268

“slippery, slick” and as “smooth, smooth-tongued; cunning, crafty.” If not slippery eels, then the use of “slipperiness” to describe an abstract human quality likely has a very widespread occurrence cross-culturally.

FROGS Frog metaphors incorporate two named categories: tu gea, denoting the Brown bullfrog Kaloula baleata, and pake, a more general term for frogs. Nage regard tadpoles (ana fe) not as immature frogs but as essentially different creatures that nevertheless transform into frogs. As a component of their name, therefore, ana does not mean “child(ren)” nor does unanalyzable fe mean “frog,” and I include the single Nage tadpole metaphor in the present section not for reasons of folk taxonomy but merely for convenience. 474. Belly of a bullfrog Tuka tu gea A person with a bloated or distended abdomen The body of the Brown bullfrog (tu gea) inflates considerably when it vocalizes, a feature Nage regularly mention when distinguishing this frog from others. 475. Bullfrog holding its breath Tu neke ngai A person with a large belly; someone who has difficulty breathing; a person who makes him- or herself appear more powerful than he or she actually is in order to impress others or threaten adversaries More recent evidence dispels previously registered doubt (Forth 2016, 221) that tu, a lexeme with several meanings, refers in this context to the Brown bullfrog, more completely known as tu gea. In all senses, the metaphor is motivated by the bullfrog’s habit of inflating its body. In the first sense, referents include a woman in late pregnancy and someone severely constipated. In the second, the phrase refers to a person suffering from lung disease and who, somewhat like an inflated frog, holds his or her breath or is unable fully to exhale. Also relevant here is the Nage idea that consuming the flesh of the Brown

268

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 269

bullfrog can relieve lung disorders (nowadays usually referred to as “asthma”) and a children’s pastime that involves holding a bullfrog and reciting tu tu neke ngai, tu tu neke ngai as the frog’s belly expands further and further. The third and more abstract sense of the metaphor recalls the semantically similar English idioms “to puff oneself up,” “to puff up one’s chest,” and “puffed-up.” Nage describe the Brown bullfrog as inflating its body not only while vocalizing but, more deliberately, to scare off enemies. 476. Eyeballs like a squeezed frog Ana mata bhia pake kese A person with round, bulging eyes The usage is synonymous with “eyes like gecko’s eggs” (No. 452). 477. Frog inside a bamboo tube Pake one tobho A statement for which evidence is lacking, or whose source and therefore value is indeterminate The metaphor turns on the image of a vocalizing frog hidden inside a container: its call (the “statement”) can be heard but the creature cannot be seen, nor perhaps can one know from where exactly the sound is coming. Reflecting a general value Nage place on the visual sense as a source of accurate knowledge (Forth 2016), commentators compared the metaphor to Indonesian kabar angin (literally, “wind news,” “news brought by the wind”), referring to a rumour or unsubstantiated report. In terms of imagery, however, the expression bears a greater similarity to Indonesian “frog under a half coconut shell” (katak dalam tempurung), although this has a different meaning – namely, people whose knowledge is limited because their vision or experience is restricted. The Indonesian metaphor also occurs in a Sikkanese expression, ganu bla’ur deri é’i korak (Pareira and Lewis n.d., 92, s.v. katak), but no interpretation is provided for this. 478. Frog that has taken a great leap Pake bago méze A person who, after attaining a high position, no longer considers the interests of relatives and associates

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

269

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 270

Commentators remarked how a person who has thus risen not only will no longer help his fellows but may even exploit them – or “eat their eggs (spawn)” as this was once expressed. One man gave as an example people who have attained modern political office or high-ranking positions in the civil service. However, no other evidence suggests the metaphor is modern or could not apply in traditional contexts. The Nage expression largely parallels English “to leapfrog (over someone or something),” meaning “to move ahead of someone” and often used for a person who is promoted over someone of higher rank (Palmatier 1995, 230). Previously (Forth 2016) I showed how pake bago (“leaping frog”) can be interpreted as a named taxon (specifically a folk-varietal) comprising an unidentified kind of large frog. However, in the present metaphor it seems to refer to any sort of frog (pake). 479. Frog of two rivers Pake lowo dhua A person with divided loyalties, a person who maintains residence in two different places The two interpretations are closely related since, among Nage, being resident in two different places (villages) generally involves being simultaneously obligated to two different groups. The metaphor always implies a negative evaluation and is comparable to English “running with the fox and hunting with the hounds.” More specific interpretations offered by commentators included simultaneously claiming membership of two different clans – a phenomenon actually quite common in central Nage but openly disapproved by many people – and being married to two women (bhia ta’a fai dhua dhua, “to be like a man with two wives”), a situation that, since co-wives were usually housed in separate dwellings, formerly would usually require a man to divide his time between two different houses and villages. (“Like a man with two wives,” it should be noted, is itself a metaphor insofar as it is used in a more general reference to divided loyalties.) Since mass conversion to Catholicism, polygyny has become disapproved by Nage, although it still occasionally occurs. Other interpretations suggested the metaphor could apply to a procrastinator or a person unable to make a choice between two alternatives, but I am unsure how often it is used in this sense.

270

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 271

480. Frogs calling Pake polu A number of people all talking at once, a noisy gathering The basis of the metaphor is the fact that frog vocalizations are mostly noticed when a large number of frogs are calling at the same time. Interestingly, this behaviour suggests the kind of frog named tu gea (the Brown bullfrog) as opposed to other frogs called pake. Pake, however, is also employed in a broader sense that includes the bullfrogs. 481. Frogs have livers, crayfish have bellies Pake ne’e ate, kuza ne’e tuka Everyone should consider and be well disposed to their fellows This is sometimes rendered the other way around, as “crayfish have bellies, frogs have livers.” Nage speak of the liver (ate) and the belly (tuka) as the sites of thought and feelings, and they sometimes combine these as tuka ate (“belly [and] liver”) when referring to psychological qualities or qualities of character often expressed with ate alone (as in ate méze, literally “big livered”). As among other Indonesian peoples, “liver” for Nage is symbolically equivalent to “heart” among English and other European speakers. A common proverb, the expression is used when admonishing people who act in a thoughtless, unfeeling way by pointing out that “even frogs and crayfish” (éle pake ne’e ate) have thoughts and feelings (specifically for other frogs and crayfish). As crayfish and frogs are small aquatic animals, their selection here appears partly motivated by their representation as lowly creatures, otherwise inferior to humans, but who in their consideration of creatures of the same kind nevertheless compare favourably to an unfeeling or ungenerous human. Attesting to the figurative character of this expression, Nage, as I was able to confirm, do not regard crayfish or frogs as particularly thoughtful or feeling creatures, hence the usage cannot be adduced as evidence of any animistic ontology. In fact, as much as anything the selection of pake (frogs) and kuza (crayfish) reflects prosodic considerations and, particularly, the assonance of the two animal names and ate (“liver,” or metaphorically, “heart”) and tuka (“belly”), respectively.

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

271

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 272

482. Hair like a frog’s fingers (digits) Fu bhia kanga pake Human head hair that is unwashed or uncombed Other than their being long and thin, what might link frog digits in particular with such hair is uncertain. But additional factors could be their shiny or greasy appearance and bulbous tips, which might be compared with knots or tangles in dishevelled or matted head hair. 483. Frog pig Wawi pake A variety of wild pig Recorded just once, the term refers to a kind of pig reputedly able to jump into thick forest vines or tree branches when pursued by hunting dogs. Such pigs are more often called wawi kua (see No. 324) and, in the ‘Ua region, wawi take (Forth 2016, 97). 484. Tadpole with its mouth open feeding on dirt Ana fe ta nganga zaki A shiftless person who eats at others’ expense Nganga means “to open the mouth to receive food,” while zaki more specifically refers to human body dirt. The image conveyed is that of a creature with its mouth regularly open, depending on others for sustenance, hence the phrase serves as an apt metaphor for a sponger or free-loader. As tadpoles breathe through gills like fish, their throats move regularly through pulsing, thus apparently giving the impression of eating. Zaki may be especially appropriate as it can be understood specifically as a reference to dirt that accumulates on the body of someone engaging in physical labour and from whose efforts an idler might derive sustenance.

CROCODILE Crocodiles, more specifically marine crocodiles Crocodylus porosus, no longer occur within territories to which central Nage have regular access, but they

272

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 273

did so until the 1950s, when they would ascend far up the river Ae Sésa (Forth 2016, 221–4). As the following attests, they still survive in several conventional metaphors. 485. Crocodile Ngebu A greedy, rapacious or avaricious person; a man who constantly chases women, a lecher Specific applications of the metaphor combine greed for food or other material things with an excessive sexual appetite, thus reflecting the universal symbolic equation of eating and sexual intercourse. As other metaphors suggest, Nage regard crocodiles as voracious eaters, and in the first sense this metaphor is synonymous with No. 488. 486. Crocodile down by the coast, there is nothing it does not desire Ngebu lau mau, mona apa bau A philanderer who will engage any woman in intercourse While this usage depicts the crocodile as given specifically to sexual excess, it is not clear that Nage regard this as an actual attribute of the creature, and the metaphor more likely owes more to the symbolic equation of food and sex mentioned in regard to No. 485. As discussed with reference to the dolphin metaphor (No. 463), “down by the coast” can have a double meaning, denoting both the environment of saltwater crocodiles and the lower part of the body (where of course the genitalia are located). One variant of a complementary expression is “gogo up on the volcano, there is nothing that will satisfy it (or, that it will refuse)” (gogo zéle lobo mona apa mozo), a reference to a legendary and now extinct group of hominoids represented as gluttons and reputed once to have lived high on the slopes of the Ebu Lobo volcano (Forth 2008). 487. Crocodile of the lower regions Ngebu ngeda People who spend all or most of their time in the fields

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

273

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 274

The expression is largely synonymous with uta tua, “vegetables and palm wine,” meaning basic foodstuffs – a disparaging reference to people who are primarily occupied in subsistence activities and so rarely leave their gardens. From Bo’a Wae and other central Nage villages, ngeda refers to seaward regions where much agricultural land is located, and being the place of larger rivers as well, it was also here that Nage would formerly encounter crocodiles. As the metaphor refers more specifically to people preoccupied with subsistence tasks – or who, as Nage say, “only work or live to eat” – it partly reflects a representation of crocodiles as voracious eaters. Like other metaphors employing crocodiles, the phrase is derogatory since it depicts people who “live in the fields” – either in lone field huts or clusters of such huts, typically distant from villages (bo’a) – as being of low status and as not involving themselves in collective rituals and other affairs of the village. It is also one of several metaphors that reveal a negative evaluation of the seaward direction (lau; see Nos. 36, 87, 103, 164). According to one commentator, ngebu ngeda is a misconstrual of ngibu ngeda, where ngibu means “to hide oneself, stay hidden.” If this is correct, most people at present nevertheless understand the phrase as ngebu ngeda and thus as a reference to the crocodile. Also reflecting a general understanding of the phrase as a reference to crocodiles, another informant provided a more elaborate interpretation, claiming it applied not just to people who live more or less permanently outside of established villages but also to people thus domiciled who steal crops and also livestock – as, in the case of livestock, crocodiles also once did. 488. Of the crocodile tribe ‘Ili ko’o ngebu A greedy person The metaphor is considered synonymous with “of the python tribe” (No. 438) and reflects the same motivation. How accurate the reputation for greed of either crocodiles or pythons may be is debatable. On the one hand, hungry crocodiles will quickly devour the entire carcass of a large animal; on the other, like pythons and other reptiles, they can go without food for considerable lengths of time.

274

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 275

489. Crocodile’s tail Éko ngebu The zig-zag pattern or series of serrations carved along the outer branches of a forked sacrificial post (peo) Whether the motif is intended to represent anything in particular is unclear, and it is quite possible that the sawback pattern is named only for its resemblance to the bony scutes on a crocodile’s back rather than an original intention to render part of the posts in the shape of a crocodile because of some quality that crocodiles represent for Nage (Forth 1994; see also No. 457).

SEA TURTLE Although freshwater turtles appear to have been present in more easterly parts of Flores during the twentieth century (Forth 2017c; Forth 2018d) and may still survive in some places, before the advent of mass media these animals were unknown in central Nage. By contrast, marine turtles have evidently been known for a long time, even though, as sea creatures, they are of course extra-territorial. Nage call turtles kea, the same name applied to cockatoos, although deriving from a different protoform, and to distinguish the marine reptiles they specify them as kea mesi, “sea kea” (Forth 2016, 224–6). 490. Sea turtle that turns its head from side to side while being butchered Kea mézo keti A person who appears perplexed or disoriented, not knowing where to turn for assistance As a highland people with little direct knowledge of killing and butchering turtles, Nage have evidently borrowed this metaphor from coastal populations. The expression alludes to the behaviour of turtles that, after being captured and brought to shore, will move their heads from side to side in an apparent state of bewilderment while their flesh is being cut into strips (keti). As some Nage know, and as I also heard from coastal Lio, a turtle’s head and eyes will still move for some time after the animal is slaughtered, and even after the head is severed. For this reason, Lio wawi kéra, “(sea) turtle pig,”

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

275

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 276

refers to pig meat that “still moves” after the carcass is butchered (Forth fieldnotes 2017). 491. Turtle tuber Kebu kéra A kind of wild tuber Kéra is the term for marine turtles in the Ngadha and Lio languages, and Nage interpreted it here as a reference to turtles. In addition, commentators explained the name as describing the shape of the tuber, which in contrast to other tubers called kebu, which are generally round, are elliptical like the shell of a turtle. Conclusions and Comparisons For a variety reasons that should not need rehearsing, it is highly unlikely people anywhere who are familiar with snakes do not make some symbolic use of them. English metaphors that employ “snake” or “serpent” as a reference to a treacherous, malicious, or worthless person (Palmatier 1995, 338, 354) are well known, and, reflecting a broader European tradition, have undoubtedly been influenced by the Old Testament. As seen above, Nage snake metaphors are similarly negative. Yet this observation applies to their animal metaphors generally, and, moreover, metaphors exploiting snakes appear more diverse in their range of interpretations than do Western snake metaphors. As discussed previously for birds, several factors affect which snake categories are employed as metaphors and, among those that are, which are employed more extensively. Especially interesting is further evidence for a correlation between metaphorical use and monomial naming. Thus, besides nipa (“snake”), the five individual snake kinds deployed metaphorically are named with single lexemes (ba, gala, goka, hiku, and sawa), and the only monomially designated snake not employed metaphorically is goko, the socalled “Flying snake” Chrysopelea sp.2 Contrariwise, the only binomially (or trinomially) designated snake that occurs as a metaphor is nipa ulu pali, the “two-headed snake,” but since here the metaphor coincides with the entire name – comprising the word for snake (nipa) plus a modifying phrase –

276

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 277

syntactically this hardly differs from an expression like “snake coiled in a hole” (No. 420). On the other hand, neither naming nor empirical factors clearly explain the absence or paucity of some snakes among Nage metaphors. Pythons (goka) are by far the largest snakes known to Nage and are prominent in other ways – practically, as a source of medicine and, since the 1970s, as food (Forth 2016, 195–8) and, symbolically, as the principal embodiment of forest spirits – and yet pythons provide the vehicle of just one metaphor. In addition, there is no reason to believe that pythons are focal to any of the snake metaphors that simply specify nipa (“snake”). Goko, the Flying snake, is not a metaphor even though the snake is definitely familiar to Nage, partly because of its curious ability to “fly” (casting itself from treetops and gliding) but also because of its habit of stealing hen’s eggs. All the same, goko also ranked low in Nage free-lists, whereas the five kinds mentioned earliest and most frequently in the lists – sawa (rat snake), goka (python), ba (Russell’s viper), hiku (pit viper), and gala (bronzeback; Forth 2016, 190) – are precisely the five that occur in Nage metaphors. This evidence attests to what may seem a common-sense connection between the extent to which people are familiar with animals and their metaphorical deployment. Yet it does not explain why metaphors employing ba and gala, the third and fifth in the recall lists, are more numerous than expressions incorporating the other three, which in fact provide just one metaphor each. Among lizards, the two largest kinds, both common, provide the most metaphors. These are the Water monitor (ghoa) and the Tokay gecko (teke), the vehicles of seven and nine metaphors, respectively. Both lizards are also monomially named. Of the three remaining lizards, all named binomially, the skink, mapa bonga, is the source of just three metaphors, and, interestingly enough, in two of these the creature’s name is abbreviated to mapa. The other two, the House lizard and Flying lizard, occur in no metaphors at all. As with the non-metaphorical Flying snake (goko), the Flying lizard’s unusual method of locomotion evidently has not inspired any use as a verbal symbol. Although it is the smallest lizard, the absence of the House lizard from Nage metaphors is perhaps more curious as, being ubiquitous inside houses, it is by far the most frequently encountered. Apart from those incorporating ika, “fish (in general),” Nage metaphors employing creatures they classify as fish incorporate just six of a much larger

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

277

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 278

number of categories. Two of these, moreover, are marine creatures – lobhu (dolphin) and iu (shark) – neither of which is particularly familiar to central Nage, while of the remainder, comprising more familiar freshwater fish, three are named binomially (ana bo, kaka watu, and tebhu teke). The sixth is ipu, “fish fry.” None of four non-exotic freshwater fish known to Nage (Forth 2016, 212, table 9.2) occurs as a metaphor, but apart from their recent introduction, this is consistent with their names – all binomials incorporating ika (fish). In contrast, frogs, although they are small and relatively unremarkable creatures with few practical uses, provide the vehicles of a relatively high number of Nage animal metaphors – ten, or eleven if the single metaphor incorporating “tadpole” (ana fe) is included.3

278

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 279

7 Metaphors with Bugs: Insects and Other Invertebrates

Discussed in this chapter are seventy-five metaphorical expressions incorporating invertebrates – mostly creatures known to the majority of anglophones as “insects” or “bugs.” Unlike “bird,” “snake,” “fish,” “mammal,” and even “lizard,” invertebrates do not compose a single life form for Nage, or any kind of discrete folk taxon more inclusive than the folk-generic. Forth (2016, 329–40) records 113 invertebrate folk-generics (e.g. poi, “grasshopper”; fua, “wasp”) and sixty-four named folk-specifics (e.g., poi godo, a small greenish grasshopper; fua ‘ége ngéke, literally “narrow-waisted wasp”), thus making a total of 177 categories prospectively employable as conventional metaphors. Nage, however, employ just fifty-one of these. Palmatier (1995) identifies forty-four invertebrates used in English metaphors (including “insect” and “spider”), thus not many fewer than in Nage. Curiously, though, Nage metaphors do not include butterflies and moths or, with one arguable exception (No. 533), spiders.1 The fifty-one invertebrate categories employed in Nage metaphors include forty-five folk-generics and six folk-specifics, a fact reflecting the proportionally higher number of named folk-specific taxa in Nage invertebrate taxonomy. Even so, in comparison to other animals, invertebrates are metaphorically underexploited, a circumstance mostly attributable to their small size. What is more, thirty-four of the total fifty-one, including all six of the folk-specifics, occur in just a single metaphor. By contrast, only two mammal categories are used just once – ngo ngoe (No. 155) and dhéke laghi (No. 192) – while the comparable figures for birds are nineteen of forty-nine, and for reptiles and other non-mammalian vertebrates, eight of twenty-two.

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 280

Below I list invertebrates in the same sequence employed in Forth (2016, 329–40), with English translations of individual metaphors listed alphabetically. As was also done in the earlier book, and in order to facilitate comparison between expressions incorporating the same creatures, several kinds of invertebrates are further grouped together under general headings, including grasshoppers and crickets, wasps, ants, and others.

GRASSHOPPERS and CRICKETS • Orthoptera 492. Grasshoppers clustering around dog faeces Poi ligo ta’i lako A person or a group of people immediately drawn to something Like “flies swarming around a sore” (No. 518), the metaphor is essentially the same as English “bees around a honey pot,” or “flies round a dung heap.” Of several kinds of grasshoppers and locusts Nage distinguish by name, one is called “dog faeces grasshopper” (poi ta’i lako), the specific source of the present expression. 493. Little grasshopper Poi sunu ki A small, sickly child The more specific referent is children who are stunted or small for their age as well as not particularly healthy. Poi sunu ki is a folk taxonomic name, denoting a small green kind of grasshopper with a sharp or protruding snout. This last feature would appear to be reflected in the name as sunu ki refers to small, newly emerged, and rather sharp sprouts of Imperata grass (Imperata cyclindrica; Nage ki). Nage, however, disagree over the name, and the original form may be sulu ki, “alighting vertically on Imperata grass stems,” an attributed behaviour of this species, which is further described as being as small or thin as an Imperata stalk. Because the grasshopper is smaller than other kinds of grasshopper, the metaphor is nevertheless in both cases appropriate to a child who is especially small. By the same token, the usage is reminiscent

280

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 281

of American English “knee high to a grasshopper,” although this usually refers to a child who is very young (Palmatier 1995, 224) rather than to one whose growth is retarded. 494. Thighs of a grasshopper Pa’a poi A person who is extremely thin and weak In the form “your thighs are like the thighs of a grasshopper,” the phrase is used to deprecate and taunt adversaries. In a famous oration, a sort of diatribe (bhea) ascribed to Lowa Bata, the ancestor of the clan Deu in the village of Tolo Pa, the phrase complements “having the crown of a rhinoceros beetle” (No. 524). 495. While harvesting look to the front where the little godo grasshopper kicks, (but) do not forget to look to the back where the little ke’o grasshopper rubs its buttocks Pogo bipa latu wa’a ngia ta’a ana poi godo kidha, ma’e ghéwo gula latu wa’a logo ana poi ke’o ta’a ‘oco People and other things that prevent success in an undertaking Poi godo and poi ke’o are folk-taxonomic names for two kinds of grasshoppers. The phrases form part of songs performed during the rice harvest, where the grasshoppers serve as metaphors for all things that can cause rice seed to fall to the ground and thus reduce the size of the yield. 496. Grasshopper eggs Telo poi A decorated textile motif comprising a thin line Grasshopper eggs are laid in yellowish elliptical clusters forming strings of up to three centimetres in length, with one cluster I observed measuring one by 1.5 centimetres. The motif notionally resembles these strings (see Figure 29).

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

281

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 282

Figure 29 Grasshopper eggs motif (No. 496)

497. Cricket [and] tiny bat Cico méca Someone who (unreasonably) considers him- or herself superior to others Not widely known in central Nage, méca is a word for tiny bats in dialects to the northeast; the usual central Nage term is ‘ighu (see No. 248). The metaphor was first recorded as a reference to bothersome children, used by adults mostly as a way of venting annoyance. As applied to adults, however, it describes a person who puts himself before others, for instance a man who – to cite an example given by a female informant – pushes his way to the front of a crowd. According to the same source, crickets and tiny bats are metaphorically deployed in this context because they are very small creatures able to enter cracks and fit into narrow spaces. As explained elsewhere, tiny bats in fact nest inside bamboo internodes, which they enter through cracks (Forth 2016, 283–4).

282

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 283

MANTIS • Dictyoptera 498. Praying mantis on top of a cotton blossom Kaka koda tolo bhena An idle person who waits to be fed Nage describe mantises as sitting motionless while waiting for smaller insect prey to come to them. The metaphor is thus synonymous with “monitor lizard collecting ants” (No. 441).

WASPS • Hymenoptera, superfamily Vespoidea, Vespidae 499. Entering an in-law’s house like a wasp piercing vegetables Nuka sa’o tu’a bhia fua zeka uta A new wife who often returns to her parents This is the female version, as it were, of No. 502. After completion of bridewealth, Nage couples usually take up residence with the husband’s parents, if not in the same house then in the same village. The expression refers more specifically to a newly married woman who, unconventionally, frequently and without good reason returns to her parents’ residence. Nage wives may legitimately visit their parents but only when there is a definite reason for doing so (e.g., to attend a funeral or participate in some other ritual undertaking) and then only in the company of members of their husband’s family – that is, as wife-takers. Selection of the wasp in this metaphor is apparently motivated by the same considerations as apply in No. 502, and both represent inconstancy in conjugal relationships by reference to an insect flying from plant to plant. 500. Hornet striking Ngika tau A blow to the head with something hard; a sudden, very severe pain Ngika is a large hornet whose extremely painful bite Nage describe as possibly fatal. When the hornet strikes, it is said, the stinger makes a noise, like a piece of wood or similar object striking a body. The phrase is used especially with

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

283

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 284

reference to pugilistic competitions (etu), when a competitor delivers a blow to an opponent’s head with a kepo, a sort of cosh described in No. 408. Here, as in other contexts, tau, “to do, make,” has the sense of “to attack.” 501. Small wasp (and) fig sap Ta’i cu’a nana a A stingy, ungenerous person or someone who is unresponsive or unaccommodating Meaning “dirt from a digging stick,” ta’i cu’a is the name of a honey-producing insect resembling a very small wasp. (Although previously described as a wasp [Forth 2016, 331], the creature may in fact be a tiny bee.2) The insects are named for a dark, sticky substance found inside their nests, which clings to their bodies, like soft soil on a digging stick. As a complementary term “fig sap” (nana a) identically refers to a sticky substance that is very difficult to dislodge, thus the two terms together serve as an appropriate metaphor for things – be they material goods, information, or assistance – that an ungenerous person is reluctant to give away. 502. Wasp piercing vegetable blossoms Fua ta’a zeka wonga uta A man who goes from woman to woman The metaphor can refer specifically to a young man who, for a time, works for a woman’s parents with the apparent intention of marrying her, but who after a while becomes attracted to another woman. The motivation is a wasp flitting from plant to plant, thus reflecting the behaviour of an inconstant suitor. “Vegetable blossom” more specifically refers to the blossoms of pumpkins (hea, specifically the ash gourd Benincasa hispida), and, according to Nage, should a wasp pierce these (or, more particularly, what is apparently the female flower), then no fruit will develop and the plant will be ruined. Evidently described here is an insect behaviour known as “nectar robbing.” Practised by wasps, bees, other insects, and even some birds and mammals, this involves “stealing” nectar by perforating floral tissue rather than entering from the floral opening and thereby contributing to pollination – although possibly contrary to the Nage view, this is not always harmful to the plant

284

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 285

(Irwin et al. 2010). Why wasps in particular are employed as the vehicle for this metaphor is unclear, but, insofar as the same behaviour motivates No. 499, it is possible that prosody plays the decisive role in view of the assonance of fua (wasp) and uta, and in the earlier metaphor also the rhyme with tu’a (a wife’s parents or, prospectively, the parents of the abandoned woman in the present metaphor). 503. Yellow wasp whose sting hurts straightaway, narrow-waisted wasp whose bite is very painful Fua te’a ta’a kiki ‘o méma, fua ‘ége ngéke ta’a kiki ‘o ‘é’e People of the opposite sex who are capable of harming one another These are lyrics of a néke song performed by women and men in turns and warning members of the opposite sex that they risk harm, or can be “bitten” (kiki), if they become involved with the singers. “Yellow wasp” and “narrowwaisted wasp” are both folk-taxonomic names denoting different kinds of wasps, the latter being known in English as “thread-waisted wasps.” Most commentators understood “narrow-waisted wasp” as a specific reference to a woman, the similar anatomical feature in humans being considered a mark of female beauty, and accordingly “yellow wasp” as a reference to a man.

ANTS • Hymenoptera, superfamily Vespoidea, Formicidae 504. Ant that carries coconut dregs on its head Metu su’u pe’a A person who takes on a weighty task without positive results Nage possess no completely inclusive term for “ant.” Metu, however, denotes several kinds of small, red-coloured ants, each distinguished by a qualifier (e.g., metu lade), and it may be consistent with this that metu occurs in the majority of ant metaphors, though mule, designating a kind of black ant, comes a close second. A standard binary composite referring to ants in general is metu mule. In the present expression the worthlessness of coconut dregs (pe’a) – coconut flesh from which the milk has already been pressed – is crucial to the metaphor, as it is to No. 505.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

285

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 286

505. Ant that repeatedly carries off coconut dregs Metu pa’u pe’a A person who regularly causes trouble or who brings trouble to a community Apparently informing this metaphor is the fact that, when carrying off coconut dregs, ants will come back several times to a single spot to collect more. Otherwise, commentators provided a number of somewhat diverse interpretations. These included: a person who engages repeatedly in an act; someone who continually causes trouble; a person who does not fit in or get along with others; someone who brings other people’s problems “to places where these are not necessary or appropriate”; a person who moves from place to place; and someone who introduces outsiders to a community who then cause trouble. The last interpretation, which overlaps some of the others, seemed especially pertinent. 506. Ant that smells meat Metu mazo poza A person from whom it is difficult to keep anything hidden, and who eventually discovers what others are trying to conceal According to Nage, the metaphor has its basis in the ability of ants to find their way to food that is hidden away or out of sight. 507. Nose like an ant Bhia izu metu A person who simply appears at a gathering where meat is being consumed, typically a sacrificial ritual, without being invited; someone from whom it is difficult to hide anything As one commentator gave as an example a wife or children who always find tobacco or money a man has saved for himself, the metaphor is partly synonymous with the preceding (No. 506). Also, the entomological motivation is the same – ants attracted by food or the remains of human food. (Cf. Indonesian ada gula ada semut, “where there is sugar there are ants.”)

286

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 287

508. Red ants and black ants Metu mule A large number of people assembled in a single place As the two ant terms in combination convey the sense of ants in general, the resultant phrase, conveying so comprehensive a connotation, serves as an appropriate metaphor for a multitude of humans – or, as one might say, “all sorts of people.” 509. Black ants on top of a bamboo fence Mule tolo mada A couple who enter into a conjugal relationship without bridewealth or before marriage payments are complete The relationship to which this metaphor refers differs from illicit sex (which has its own, separate metaphors) since it concerns couples who themselves initiate a conjugal relationship, openly cohabit, and may bear several children before any bridewealth is paid. Typically, such unions are also accepted by both sets of parents and can be as durable as other marriages. Mada refers to a high bamboo fence constructed inside a village to provide an enclosure for special public events such as large-scale buffalo sacrificing (pa sése) and etu (annual pugilistic competitions). Mule are black ants typically encountered on tree trunks and branches, and, as Nage remark, wherever there is a mada these ants will be found crawling along the top. As was further explained, two ants coming from opposite directions and meeting in the middle of a fence top will, after sniffing one another, usually go off together in a single direction. 510. Numerous as black ants in the hills, as dense as fish fry in the estuary Woso bhia mule zéle wolo, kapa bhia ipu lau nanga A large number of offspring or descendants Nage employ these phrases in rites of offering to ancestors and other beneficent spiritual entities, requesting that humans and livestock be prolific and multiply. Comparable usages employing mammals and birds include Nos. 123 and 270. Although “hill, highland” is a more specific sense, wolo can more

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

287

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 288

generally mean “dry land” in contrast to bodies of water. Like other parallelistic metaphors employed in ritual address, therefore, creatures of the dry land are here contrasted with creatures of the river or sea. In this instance, of course, the two sorts of animals concerned are also ones that occur in extremely large numbers. 511. Tree ant’s backside ‘Obo mesa A person with large, protruding buttocks Usually expressed as “having buttocks like a mesa ant,” the phrase is most often applied to a woman. The ant named mesa, typically found in trees, is distinguished from other ants by a gaster (abdomen) that points upwards and is therefore especially noticeable.

BEES • Hymenoptera, superfamily Apoidea 512. Bees inside a cavity (nest) ‘Ua one hodo A person who mumbles or speaks incoherently; several people speaking simultaneously so that one cannot make out what they are saying When applied to several people, the metaphor obviously recalls the English expression “buzz of conversation.” ‘Ua apparently denotes the bee Apis indica or A. cerana indica. 513. Honey-bees have hung their nests, (other) bees have suspended their hives Ani ne dadi, eo ne tépo People who maintain long residence in a place or who possess much experience of something The metaphor is sometimes employed in self-reference (“I am/we are bees that have hung their nests …”). Ani are a kind of honey bee (Apis dorsata) that suspends nests from tree branches. By contrast, Nage describe ‘ua, another

288

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 289

kind of honey bee (see No. 512), as typically nesting in cavities in or near the ground, thus explaining why ani is the vehicle of the present metaphor. Rather than a separate species, eo, bees described as occupying part of the same nests, apparently refers to drones. Dadi and tépo, “to hang, suspend,” are synonyms, while “nests” and “hives” is a distinction required only for purposes of translation. The parallelistic expression refers to the fact that hives can be inhabited for a long time or rebuilt in the same place. Applied to humans, the metaphor usually conveys a positive assessment, alluding to rights acquired or affirmed through a group’s long occupation of a territory. According to another interpretation, it refers not so much to long occupation of a place but to people who have travelled far and gained much experience before finally settling down. Ne is an abbreviation of négha, “already,” a usual way of registering the past tense. 514. Orphan bee ‘Ua ta’a ana halo A person who lacks family or companions More specific interpretations included a person or small family that does not possess or associate with other kin, and a couple with few or no children who therefore have few people to turn to for assistance. The metaphor reflects the Nage observation that, while bees characteristically occur in swarms, occasionally one can encounter a single bee or a small number of bees – for example, when a few remain after the majority have abandoned a nest. I also recorded the expression as ani ana halo (see No. 513). 515. Other bees have suspended their hives, eo ne tépo. See Honey-bees have hung their nests (No. 513).

FLIES and MOSQUITOES • Diptera 516. Fly alighting on sores Hale celo teka A person who frequently changes what he or she is doing

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

289

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 290

Celo more exactly means “to alight successively in various places, flying hither and yon,” and here more specifically describes a fly moving from sore to sore among a herd of animals and not remaining long on any single sore. The human “fly” can be someone who similarly moves from place to place. But probably a more usual application is someone who frequently changes tasks, not finishing any one before moving on to another (as in the expression kema bhia na’a hale celo teka, “to work like a fly moving from sore to sore”). This, then, is one of a number of Nage metaphors that express disapproval of people who are inconstant in their efforts and will start a task before completing another. According to another interpretation, the metaphor can also refer to someone who keeps changing sides in a dispute. In as much as it depicts insects moving quickly from place to place, the Nage usage might recall English “blue-arsed fly” (apparently a bluebottle or blowfly, a kind Nage call hale mite, “black, dark fly”), which refers to a person who is excessively busy, hurrying from task to task. 517. Fly following a sore Hale dhéko teka A person who habitually follows another The metaphor is motivated by the habit of flies persistently following ulcerated sores on the bodies of livestock as the animals move about. Several specific interpretations were recorded: someone always quick to take advantage of a situation, thus an opportunist; a person who continually pursues another, perhaps seeking support or assistance, and who is difficult to get rid of; and a group of people, for example a gang of youngsters, who follow a person around, especially a stranger or visitor whom they find curious or interesting. Tule (1998, 94) lists a cognate expression in central Keo (ade dhéko neka) as a reference to “loyal followers,” but this meaning seems not to be recognized by Nage. 518. Flies swarming around a sore Hale mole teka A number of males drawn to an attractive woman

290

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 291

In this expression, hale is always understood in the plural (flies). The metaphor is virtually identical to English “bees around a honey pot” (see also No. 492). 519. Mosquitoes and flies Emu hale People who are “small” and socially insignificant, or children or other people who are bothersome From both the small size of these flying insects and the obvious ways in which they annoy humans, the motivation for this metaphor is straightforward, and in both respects the usage is comparable to “bedbugs [and] dog fleas” (see No. 536). In the first sense the metaphor can be expressed as an admonition, “do not follow people who are mosquitoes and flies” (ma’e dhéko ta’a ata ta’a emu hale), meaning “do not emulate, trust, or have faith in insignificant people, people of little account.” Dhéko, “to follow,” can also mean “to believe (in).” As a reference to insignificant humans, Nage “mosquitoes and flies” is synonymous with English “insect” in the sense of “an insignificant or contemptible person” (Oxford English Reference Dictionary).

BEETLES • Coleoptera 520. Dung beetle informs the earthquake Banga soke ebu A bringer of false news, especially a report that causes others to act unnecessarily or inappropriately A slightly different interpretation offered by one informant concerns someone who cannot keep a secret and will pass on whatever he or she hears, regardless of its veracity. The metaphor derives from a belief concerning earthquakes (ebu weo). Nage say tremours occur when a dung beetle (banga or banga ta’i) is unable to find dung (ta’i) and so incorrectly infers that humans have vanished from the earth. This the beetle communicates to Ebu – which can be understood as a reference either to the earthquake personified or, as Nage explain, to god (ga’e déwa). To test this, god (or the earthquake) then shakes the earth to see if he can get a response. Whenever earth tremours

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

291

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 292

occur, therefore, Nage pound on floors and walls of houses while crying out “we are still here” (kami manga) so that god will know that the beetle’s report was false and stop the shaking. As the term for “grandparent, ancestor,” ebu evidently derives from a different protoform than does ebu in the sense of “earthquake,” a cognate of Ngadha repu (Arndt 1961) and eastern Sumbanese upung (Onvlee 1984 s.v.). Affirming the sense of “earthquake,” the more complete form of the Nage term is ebu weo (weo, “to shake”). All these ideas further inform the lyrics of a song: “Earthquake shakes and shudders, dung beetle digs in the earth, oh we are here” (ebu weo kéko wéjo, ana banga kore tana, o kami dia ma manga). 521. Dung beetle’s antenna grass Ego tadu banga A kind of grass The plant is so named because its seeds bear some resemblance to the beetle’s “horns” (antennae). Ego names several kinds of grasses (cf. No. 540). 522. Fireflies Lépe kobe Many lights or fires seen at a distance in the night Modifying unanalyzable lépe, kobe is “night.” Usually expressed as “like fireflies,” the expression can refer, for example, to hunters’ overnight camps made during the annual collective hunt (to’a lako). 523. Neck like a banana beetle Tengu bhia ko’o muku te’a A person who is too compliant, who gives in too easily to a request Most likely a member of the Cerambycidae, “banana beetle” refers to a small yellow beetle with dark markings which Nage compare to a “ripe banana” (muku te’a). Apparently referring to the beetle also called fugu kune (kune is “yellow”; Forth 2016, 333), I first recorded the name muku te’a in 2017. Nage know the beetle especially for its habit of moving its head up and down as if nodding in agreement – a gesture that, among Nage as among Westerners, signifies assent, acknowledgment, or understanding. A traditional children’s

292

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 293

game involves a youngster holding onto a specimen and addressing the creature with the phrases: “Ripe banana (beetle), you give me a chicken, you give me a piglet (or a foal or buffalo calf)” (Muku te’a muku te’a, kau ti’i nga’o me’a ana manu, ti’i nga’o ana wawi [ana ja, ana bhada]). After each request the speaker waits until the insect nods its head as if in agreement, and she or he may then proceed with another request. Since there is no expectation that the request will be granted, this is not a magical rite. However, one elderly man mentioned how, as a child, he would feel strange when witnessing such a tiny creature nod its head as though human and understanding what was being said. For a large part, the metaphor is synonymous to a horse metaphor (No. 47). As a negative evaluation and accusation, it appears to be used most often between spouses. 524. Crown (top of the head) of a rhinoceros beetle Todo moco A bald head or a bald-headed man The beetle’s head and a bald man’s pate are both shiny. The expression seems mostly to be used as an insult, as in a diatribe delivered by a famous ancestor, where it complements “grasshopper’s thighs” (No. 494). 525. Rhinoceros beetle’s rump Bui moco The (human) fingertip This is the only term for this body part. The motivation is not just the beetle’s shape and size, corresponding to the tip of an adult human’s finger, but its brownish-red colour as well. The metaphor is not applied to non-humans, for example, to the fingertips of monkeys. 526. Spun like a rhinoceros beetle Leo moco Someone who is easily threatened or abused Leo moco is a children’s pastime in which a rhinoceros beetle is tied to a string and swung around in the air. When addressed to a person, “you will be like

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

293

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 294

a swinging beetle” (kau bhia leo moco) constitutes a threat to the effect that, if the addressee does not comply with the speaker’s demands, he or she will be subject to the same treatment as the beetle in the children’s game. 527. Weevil holes Lia suse Pits in the skin that develop in extremely old people Suse are small weevils of the family Curculionidae that characteristically bore into dried maize and other stored goods. Nage do not regard the holes that appear on an old person’s skin as actually having been made by weevils but only as resembling holes weevils bore, for example, into dried maize cobs. Evidently referring to some skin condition, Nage say the pits – also referred to simply as suse (“weevils”) – appear on the skin of only a minority of people who reach an unusually advanced age (Forth 2018a). This I have never witnessed myself – not surprisingly, as Nage also claim that local people no longer live to such advanced ages, although they did in the past.

TRUE BUGS • Hemiptera 528. Cicadas calling Naju ta’a ie The wailing or whining of small children This is one of numerous metaphors typically uttered by parents in exasperation, when criticizing or reprimanding children or simply complaining about their crying. The call of cicadas comprises a continuous shrill, high-pitched, and rather penetrating sound produced by large numbers of the insects simultaneously rubbing their limbs together. 529. Meci pepper Ko meci A sort of pepper The colour of this small, round pepper is greenish, like the insect called meci, described as resembling a small cicada.

294

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 295

530. Stinkbug whose head has been squeezed Hengo ta’a pese ulu A person who behaves forcefully or aggressively but quickly becomes subdued when a superior arrives. Explaining the metaphor, commentators remarked how stinkbugs quickly die when their heads are squeezed between the thumb and forefinger, the usual way of killing them. Hengo denotes members of the Coreidae, of which Nage distinguish two kinds. Referring to the Green padi bug Leptocorisa acuta, one of these is named hengo ‘é’e (“bad hengo”). Since this is the kind that does damage to rice and because its smell is deemed more unpleasant than the other, larger sort of stinkbug, the vehicle of this metaphor is more likely to be the padi bug.

OTHER INSECTS 531. Chicken lice Kutu manu A bothersome person or mischievous, misbehaving children who will not heed warnings Infesting domestic fowls, these lice, though they do not bite humans, can infest people’s bodies and clothing and cause considerable irritation. One occurrence of the metaphor is in the lyrics of sort of a victory chant performed by men of ‘Abu village, led by members of the clan Tegu (“Thunder”). During the annual ritual hunt, they will exclaim: “‘Abu men are chicken lice, one can scratch but the discomfort remains” (‘Abu kutu manu, sasi pau ogi esi latu). This means that, however one responds to the actions of ‘Abu people, their effects will endure. The usage is one of relatively few instances in which animal metaphors are employed self-referentially. 532. Cockroach on the edge of a plate Ngozo wiwi kula A person who remains silent when others speak and does not participate in a discussion

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

295

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 296

Wiwi, “lip,” here refers to the edge of a gourd-shell vessel (kula; see figure 30). Traditionally used as plates during collective, ritual meals, the inside surfaces of the vessels are blackened with soot, which acts as a preservative. Not always deterred by the soot, however, cockroaches will consume the relatively soft interiors of the vessels, especially when these are stored in dark, smoky places above hearths. The image of a cockroach silently bobbing its head seems also to contribute to the metaphor. While ngozo refers to one of two kinds of cockroaches recognized by Nage, it is nevertheless the other kind (named pegi) that is more usually found inside houses and is therefore more likely to infest gourd vessels. The specification of ngozo in the present metaphor is therefore curious, and commentators could only suggest that ngozo may be used because it “sounds better” (Forth 2015, 391–2). However, further insight may be gained from comparison with neighbouring languages. For “cockroach” in Ngadha, Arndt (1961) thus lists only ngozo, at the same time recording three compounds of the same word that make no reference to the insect. These are ngozo ngica (ngica = Nage ngia, “face”), “to stick the head out (or forward) in order to hear, see, ask a question, and so on”; papa ngozo, “to approach one another closely, come face to face”; and ngozo dho, “engrossed, absorbed in oneself ” or “rapt (in thought),” and to “sit in silence.” Especially this last sense recalls the behaviour of persons Nage compare to a “cockroach on the edge of a dish,” and it is therefore possible that the Ngadha usages either express senses of ngozo that have been lost in Nage or reflect metaphorical uses of “cockroach” (ngozo) that are not articulated in Arndt’s glosses. It is also possible that the Nage metaphor has been adopted from Ngadha. 533. Cockroach slamming into a spider’s web Pegi ni’o kaka meo A person performing a task in a laboured, awkward, or unsteady and therefore inefficient way The expression is typically employed in derisive criticism of someone making a bad job of something. Usually denoting a spider, kaka meo in this context has the alternate sense of “spider’s web.” While ni’o generally means “to slam, ram into,” it especially refers to male thrusting during sexual intercourse. It seems to retain this connotation here, although the animal behaviour depicted is in fact a cockroach that has slammed into a web and tries to extricate

296

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 297

Figure 30 Gourd-shell vessels (No. 532)

itself (thus quickly moving backwards and forwards). One recorded application was to an old and incompetent man slowly and awkwardly climbing a palm tree. Earlier reported local interpretations of the metaphor, including two people colliding and a lower-ranking man involved in a sexual relationship with a higher-ranking woman (Forth 2015, 391), now appear to be, if not inaccurate, then too specific and so insufficiently representative. 534. Small cockroach Hipa ngapi A worthless, insignificant person Described by one man as referring to someone without ideas or cares, the metaphor is often expressed as “having a mind like a hipa ngapi” (ngai zede bhia hipa ngapi). Translated here as “mind,” the concept of ngai zede was discussed earlier with reference to a dog and pig metaphor (No. 86). Whether hipa ngapi refers to an animal of any particular sort is controversial. Some Nage interpret hipa as a name for the Oriental cockroach Blatta orientalis

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

297

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 298

(Forth 2016, 336). Although most people are not familiar with this meaning, it is nonetheless interesting that the other component, ngapi, occurs as part of an invertebrate name in some dialects of Lio (Arndt 1933) – ngapi te’e, “centipede.” In both Nage and Ngadha, ngapi can mean “cliff, cliff face,” “rocky ledge.” But many people understand hipa ngapi as no more than a vague reference to a small, unknown, and insignificant creature of no specific kind. Some commentators said the metaphor refers especially to small children, particularly in regard to their lack of knowledge and understanding (and particularly in situations in which this is found annoying), but others disagreed. 535. Termite Ghane Someone who appears honourable but has unseen negative qualities Ghane denotes a kind of termite Nage describe as infesting only the lower portion of wooden house posts set in the ground, where the insect’s destructive activity goes unnoticed. By contrast, termites that infest parts of house posts or other wooden components located above ground are called ngana, a term not used as a metaphor. Since infestations of ngana are deemed “inauspicious” (pie, a term also meaning “taboo”; Forth 2016, 243), however, these insects are the subject of another sort of symbolic representation. 536. Bedbugs and dog fleas (1) Maju mela People, especially young children, whose behaviour is found irritating and annoying The names of the two insects, both of which regularly occur in Nage houses, are combined to form a standard binary composite. As applied to children, the metaphor is synonymous with “mosquitoes and flies” (No. 519), and in both cases the reference to bothersome humans is reminiscent of English “bug” in the sense of “to bother, annoy, or irritate someone” (Palmatier 1995, 44). In a cleansing ceremony, maju mela refers synecdochically to all undesirable qualities that are ritually removed from a house.

298

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 299

537. Bedbugs and dog fleas (2) Maju mela The smallest or least significant of things associated with a particular place Semantically quite distinct from No. 536, this usage is listed as a separate metaphor. Should all residents of a house leave together, for example to undertake a long journey, people might sarcastically remark: “You’re all going, leaving nothing behind, having even beaten the walls and floors to remove the bedbugs and dog fleas” (Miu la’a zebu mona ési, ‘imo maju mela dhega begha). A comparable English expression is “taking everything but the kitchen sink,” a similarly sarcastic assessment describing, for example, someone who packs a great deal of luggage for a trip. In the Nage usage, however, the house becomes emptied not just of material possessions but of all living occupants. 538. Crawling bedbug Maju laka A person who moves very slowly The metaphor expresses disapproval of someone who moves or does something too slowly. 539. Bedbug mango Pau maju A variety of mango The tree is so named because its fruit has an unpleasant odour reminiscent of the smell of bedbugs. The fruit is nevertheless eaten. 540. Dog flea grass Ego mela A kind of grass or weed Although Nage confirmed that mela here refers to the flea, the motivation remains unclear. A plant that Ngadha call mata mela (mata is “eye,” “source”) has been identified as Oxalis corniculata (Verheijen 1990, 31), Creeping woodsorrel.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

299

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 300

INSECT LARVAE 541. Arse like a maggot (or worm) Bhia ‘obo ne’e ule A person who cannot keep still Besides “maggot,” ule covers a variety of insect larva, most of which wriggle and squirm. The sense is similar to English “ants in one’s pants.” 542. Bamboo on one side of the village, its stem appears fine, but a grub is boring inside Bheto zale ghoe, alu podi modhe, bholo ta’a ule kore one Something or someone that appears good from the outside but is essentially bad The phrases occur in the lyrics of a song. Although generally applied to insect larvae, here ule is more specifically interpreted as referring to a grub that infests a kind of giant bamboo (bheto). As a direction term, zale, which in central Nage refers to the direction to one’s left as one faces towards the “head” (upper end) of a village or towards the peak of the Ebu Lobo volcano, appears quite arbitrary. On the other hand, it seems relevant that, when combined with one (“inside”) to form zale one, the two terms in combination mean “inside” (as in zale one sa’o, “inside the house”). In regard to its referent, the entire expression is synonymous with “termite” (No. 535). 543. Grub sniffing its own arse Doko sengu ‘obo A quiet, inactive person who rarely leaves the house Doko names a large grub growing to a length of several centimetres and described as the larval stage of cicadas and beetles. When immobile, the grub curls up with its head in close proximity to its tail, straightening out in order to move. The phrase can also apply to the sleeping position of a human similarly disposed, that is, someone assuming a foetal position.

300

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 301

544. Grub that eats rice plants from the roots up Doko ta’a gho pae A person who does harm that is not initially detected Gho, here translated as “to eat,” more specifically means “to pull, haul, drag.” As Nage note, doko grubs nest in the earth of cultivated fields, where they will consume rice stems by feeding on the roots. As regards its human referent, therefore, the metaphor appears similar to Nos. 535 and 542. However, according to one commentator, it especially applies to shiftless children who do not work but simply live off their parents, an interpretation that apparently identifies a family (parents and children) with a house – that is, an interior place that, in this case, is gradually being damaged by an undesirable internal relationship (cf. No. 13). In regard to grubs nesting in, or under, the earth, it should be noted that zale (or zale one) means both “under, beneath” and “inside.” 545. Mosquito larva Méto A person who is restless and cannot keep still, a fidget Mosquito larvae, in English also known as “wrigglers,” constantly move and squirm in water, thus providing an appropriate metaphor for someone who fidgets, moving about compulsively and unnecessarily, and who cannot keep still (in one instance recorded as “you sit like a mosquito larva,” kau podhu bhia ko’o méto kau). A variant expression is “having an arse like a mosquito larva” (sama ‘obo ne’e méto), a synonym of “having an arse like a maggot” (No. 541). 546. Small caterpillars Ngota Livestock that do damage to cultivated fields The caterpillars occur in large irruptions every several years, and the damage they then do to crops identifies them metaphorically with larger animals that do the same. Ancestral legends commonly ascribe the movement of human groups to swarms of ngota invading houses and thus rendering settlements uninhabitable (Forth 2016, 240–1).

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

301

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 302

ARACHNIDS As a class distinct from insects, arachnids include spiders, scorpions, ticks, and mites. For present purposes, the distinction is hardly significant, yet it is noteworthy that, of the foregoing, only scorpions and mites are employed as metaphors, and I was unable to find any expressions employing spiders. 547. Rat mites Tumu dhéke Bothersome children Also called ma dhéke, the mites, too small to be seen, deliver painful, vexatious bites that Nage compare to the annoyance caused by obstreperous children who plague adults with noisy and unruly behaviour. The usage is thus one of a number of Nage metaphors with the same reference. 548. Scorpion down in the lowlands bites and causes pain but (the wound) does not bleed, Éko teko zi mala kiki ‘o mona ‘a. See Leech up in the hills bites and draws blood but (the wound) does not hurt (No. 563)

CRUSTACEANS Like insects and arachnids, crustaceans are arthropods. Among these, Nage make noticeable metaphoric use of crayfish (freshwater prawns) and crabs. “Crayfish” also forms one half of a standard composite denoting all freshwater foods, kuza tuna (“crayfish [and] eels”). 549. Arms like the claws of a crayfish Lima bhia anga kuza Someone who, at a collective meal or feast, helps himself to a lot of food; a greedy or voracious person Unmodified kuza names a Giant river prawn Macrobrachium sp., the largest sort of freshwater crustacean known to Nage. Nage nomenclature further distinguishes three growth stages of the prawn: ngoi (see No. 552), faja, and

302

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 303

lado ngao (No. 553). Related to kanga (human fingers and toes and the digits of certain vertebrate animals), anga refers exclusively to the claws, or pincers, of crustaceans and scorpions. Especially since the claws of a crayfish are large in proportion to their overall size, the metaphor is somewhat reminiscent of the English expression “having long fingers” (or being “long-fingered”) – a usage that corresponds exactly to Nage kanga léwa and refers to a thief. However, “having arms like crayfish claws” does not refer to a thief, or at least is not usually employed in this way. A plant metaphor for a thief is koba paga, “vines of the bitter gourd Momordica charantia,” which similarly are long and rambling. 550. Crayfish have bellies, Kuza ne’e tuka. See Frogs have livers (No. 481) 551. Crayfish at Au Galu retreats a long way Kuza Au Galu medhi léwa latu A person who retreats in order to avoid harm The expression is a lyric in a planting song. Au Galu is a waterside location in central Nage. The metaphor can more specifically describe a competitor in the pugilistic competition called etu, who moves backwards in order to avoid a blow. Otherwise, it refers to anyone who is sensibly cautious. The metaphor reflects the Nage observation that crustaceans often move backwards rather than forwards. Palmatier (1995, 99) records American English “crawfish” (a dialectal variant of “crayfish”), which he defines as “to retreat from a position” and explains as reflecting “the fact that all lobsterlike crustaceans, including the crawfish, have the capability of moving rapidly backward by forcing their large, flexible tail downward, again and again, until they have retreated from danger.” 552. Each pool has its own crayfish Ne’e tiwu ne’e ngoi ngata Every region or settlement has its own distinctive character Ngoi denotes a river prawn (Macrobrachium sp.) at an early stage of growth, but selection of the term may largely be determined by the alliterative effect of ngoi and ngata.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

303

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 304

553. Large crayfish Lado ngao A woman who is bold and aggressive; a person who is forceful and unwilling to accept defeat This expression was first explained as referring to “a woman who acts like a man,” or a woman who is confrontational and will not be subordinated (particularly to men), and there is a common view that the metaphor applies either exclusively or especially to females. In fact, Nage apply it to both men and women. Denoting the mature form of the Giant river prawn, lado ngao means “blue-green antennae” and describes a physical feature of the prawns. The only motivation commentators could suggest for the metaphor concerned the larger size of these prawns and their ability to dominate smaller prawns. Yet possibly also relevant is the further use of lado to denote ceremonial headdresses worn by high-ranking men. Women to whom the metaphor is applied can include females who do not demur at engaging in sex with other women’s husbands, but this apparently does not reflect Nage ideas about the behaviour of large crustaceans. 554. Small freshwater prawn Kuza kela A person who is bent over or hunchbacked This is the folk taxonomic name of a smaller kind of freshwater prawn (kuza), distinct from the Giant prawn Macrobrachium sp. Kela is “cane grass.” As the usual expression is “having a back like a kuza kela” (logo bhia kuza kela), alluding to the crustacean’s curved back, the motivation appears straightforward. However, one man interpreted the metaphor as referring instead to a dirty person, with regard to dark stripes or marks on the prawn’s back. 555. Crayfish (or prawn) plant Uta kuza A kind of wild plant Uta denotes a large class of leafy vegetables, both domestic and wild, and can contextually refer to vegetable food in general. Nage explained the name with reference both to the plant growing in watery places and a practice of cooking the leaves with freshwater prawns. 304

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 305

556. Crab in the river Doga advances in pretence Moga lowo Doga je podi we’e A person who pretends to be friendly Following “crayfish at Au Galu” (No. 551), this expression occurs in a planting song. Lowo Doga is a stream close to the main central Nage village of Bo’a Wae, but its selection is obviously motivated by the rhyme with moga (freshwater crab). The occurrence of je podi we’e, otherwise interpreted as a bird metaphor (No. 390), is noteworthy since, in this phrase, je is not the name of a bird but a verb meaning “to advance slowly” and describes the sideways motion characteristic of crabs. The human referent thus recalls the English idiom “to sidle up” (meaning “to ingratiate oneself ”). The identification of the crab as a false friend is further revealed in No. 557. 557. Crab companion Moko moga An apparent friend who nevertheless does a person harm The treacherous friend may prove harmful, for example, by regularly teasing or annoying a person or not telling the truth. Nage explain the metaphor with reference to the pinching habit of crabs, but prosody evidently plays a part as well, as is clear from the resemblance of moga and moko (“friend, companion, comrade”). A less common variant of the metaphor is moko kojo, where kojo designates saltwater crabs, an expression that is analyzable in much the same way. In Indonesian, “rock crab” (kepiting batu) is a metaphor for a stingy, tight-fisted person, but in Nage miserliness is expressed with other animal metaphors (see, e.g., No. 501). 558. Monkey and crab. See ‘o’a ne’e moga (No. 220) 559. Crab’s pincers Ngi’i kojo A gangway of stones and earth that connects lower with higher flat level areas (teda) within a village Kojo denotes a marine crab. The structures are so named because they are seen to resemble a crab’s pincers (ngi’i, otherwise the word for “tooth, teeth”). I first recorded the usage in the Keo region, on Flores’s south central coast, I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

305

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 306

but later discovered it is also used in central Nage. The structures are alternatively called kota, but as this applies to stone walls in general, “crab’s pincers” is a more specific term. 560. Large fry trick (or mislead) small fry Podhe ‘ole ipu A more powerful person who, through deceit, makes use of people less powerful The metaphor applies particularly where the party misled consequently suffers misfortune not suffered by the one who misleads. In related Florenese languages podhe denotes freshwater crab larvae, but Nage know it only as the name of an unfamiliar sea creature somewhat larger than ipu, the fry of freshwater fish (see Nos. 469–71). They also know that podhe ascend from the sea and enter rivers shortly before the fish fry, but, although they always go first, Nage say, podhe invariably manage to elude capture, unlike the smaller fry that people catch in large numbers. Hence this provides another case in which people are mostly unfamiliar with an animal that provides the vehicle of a metaphor and yet know just enough about its behaviour to construct an interpretation. Expressed as podhe ndore ipu, virtually the same metaphor is found in south coastal regions of Lio, where ndore means “to lead, take the lead” and podhe are recognized as the immature form of freshwater crabs named mongga or mbongga (cf. Nage moga).

EARTHWORMS, CENTIPEDES, and LEECHES 561. Earthworm able to emerge from the earth but unable to re-enter Ta’i hati gedho be’o kono kéwo A person who enters a situation from which he or she is subsequently unable to extricate him- or herself Here translated as “to be able,” be’o more generally means “to know,” while kéwo, “to be unable,” can also mean “no longer to know something” or “to be unable to recall” (in contrast to ghéwo, “to forget”). The expression usually refers to someone who incurs a debt but is later unable to repay or who com-

306

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 307

mits to an undertaking but cannot see it through and, thus, is largely synonymous with a rat metaphor (No. 189). As explained elsewhere, the metaphor reflects the Nage conviction that earthworms, once they have emerged from the soil, can never re-enter and so always die on the surface (Forth 2016, 259– 60). According to a slightly different version, earthworms may be able to re-enter the ground but only at a different spot and then one never sees them do so. But this is likely a rationalization of the more categorical idea, and it is this that finds expression in a magical practice whereby, in order to disable a witch, one should grind up a desiccated worm and surreptitiously place it in the suspected witch’s drink (nowadays, hot coffee is the beverage of choice). In this way, after the malevolent spirit (wa) of the witch leaves the witch’s body to cause harm, it will no longer be able to re-enter, and the witch will be powerless. To ensure its efficacy, the magical actor recites the above metaphor, proclaiming that the malevolent spirit supposedly possessed by the victim will become like the earthworm. An alternative, apparently less common, and perhaps more recent use of the metaphor is as an admonition addressed to people, especially adolescents, who leave the house and do not return when they should, staying out until well after sunset. In addition to a metaphor, Nage employ the notion of earthworms unable to return to the earth as a riddle: “(It is) able to go out but unable to go in, what is it?” The answer, of course, is an earthworm. 562. Earthworm struck by the sun Ta’i hati ta’a gena leza A person who is no longer capable, who has lost a former ability or enthusiasm for some activity As Nage remark, earthworms shrivel and die from exposure to the sun, an observation likely connected with the notion expressed in the preceding metaphor (No. 561). One man interpreted the expression as describing someone suffering from heat exhaustion, but this seems not to be the main reference. 563. Leech up in the hills bites and draws blood but (the wound) does not hurt, scorpion down in the lowlands bites and causes pain but (the wound) does not bleed Mate ze kéli kiki ‘a mona ‘o, éko teko zi mala kiki ‘o mona ‘a

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

307

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 308

Some people cause harm that cannot be felt while others cause pain but leave no visible injury As Nage pointed out, the unseen character of injury caused by a leech is compounded by the fact that bleeding occurs only after the creature has fallen off or been removed from the skin. According to a more specific interpretation, the phrases contrast a person who harms another using words alone (the leech’s method) – either in direct confrontation or by slander – with a person who attacks someone physically. Combining two parallel phrases, the expression occurs in songs accompanying circle-dancing but also functions as a proverb and – with the subjects (leech and scorpion) removed – as a riddle (“it hurts but does not bleed, it bleeds but does not hurt”). In song, the phrases describing the contrasting creatures are often rendered as ro iwa ra and ra iwa ro. As iwa is the negative in Lio and the Ja’o dialect of Endenese (cf. Nage mona), where “blood” is ra (central Nage ‘a) and “to be painful” (Nage ‘o) is ro, the expression has apparently been adopted from the east. 564. Legs and arms of a centipede Taga lima héte te’e An unusually large number of people The metaphor especially applies when many people assemble to carry out a task, so the work is completed quickly. As Nage normally describe centipedes as possessing only legs (taga), “legs and arms” apparently refers more to the human referents than to the chilipod.

GASTROPODS 565. Eyeballs like a snail Li’e mata bhia ko’o boko lo A person with large, round, and protruding eyes Having the same human referent as gecko and frog metaphors (Nos. 452, 476), the phrase alludes to the tentacles or “eye stalks” of land snails, at the ends of which the eyes are located. Relevant comparisons are English “bug-eyed” (where “bug” apparently has the colloquial American sense of a small crawling

308

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 309

or creeping animal) and “bug out,” both identically referring to people with bulging eyes. 566. Moving like a slug La’a bhia ko’o lema la Someone who walks very slowly Also recorded as la’a lema la na’a (where na’a expresses resemblance), lema la, the sole Nage term for slugs, literally means “protruding tongue” and so is itself obviously metaphorical. The longer expression is synonymous with English “sluggish” and “moving at a snail’s pace.” Summary Remarks Invertebrate categories used as metaphors reveal a preference for monomial taxa (categories named with single lexemes, or “words”) similar to what was found for vertebrate animals. Of the forty-six named invertebrates incorporated in Nage metaphors, just 28 percent (or thirteen) are binomials (e.g., kaka koda, praying mantis) whereas of the grand total of 113 the proportion of binomially named folk-generics is over 43 percent (forty-nine). In this respect invertebrates most closely compare with reptiles, fish, and amphibians (chapter 6) for which the corresponding figures are just over thirty and nearly 53 percent. (By contrast, the figures for birds are forty and 47 percent.) Among invertebrates, creatures employed most as metaphors are crustaceans, specifically crayfish (or prawns) and crabs. There are twelve crustacean metaphors divided among four named categories (kuza, moga, kojo, podhe). The next largest groups are ants and beetles (eight each), insect larvae (six), grasshoppers (five, or six including the cricket), and wasps (five). As the largest invertebrates known to Nage, the prominence of crustaceans is mostly attributable to their size and hence the relative ease with which their features and habits are observed. Nage also use crustaceans as food, but they consume many insects and insect larvae as well, so size may account for the greater incidence of crustacean metaphors more than does utilitarian value. The extent to which practical uses figure in the motivation of metaphors is discussed in the next chapter, with reference to animals of all kinds.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

309

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 310

8 The Differential Metaphorical Value of Different Animals

To paraphrase George Orwell, while all animals can serve as metaphors some are more metaphorical than others. As is clear from the previous five chapters, mammals predominate, occurring in over 42 percent (240) of the total 566 metaphors, followed by birds at over 31 percent (178), other vertebrates at just under 13 percent (73), and invertebrates at just over 13 percent (75). Comparable differences appear in the number of categories subsumed within each of the life forms that could in principle be used as metaphors in relation to how many are in fact so used. Counting all named categories – including folk-specifics (like ngo ngoe, a kind of wild cat; and “chicken monitor,” denoting a putative kind of monitor lizard) and life forms (“snake” and “fish”) as well as folk-generics (like “buffalo,” “porcupine,” “chicken,” “friarbird,” “python,” “pit viper,” “frog,” “grasshopper,” “bedbug,” and so on) – there are 318 animal categories that Nage could conceivably employ in conventional metaphors. However, the number actually employed is 140, or around 44 percent. The disparity is largely accounted for by invertebrates. Thus, while there are 177 invertebrate categories, and while these make up over half of the 318 animal categories, just 51, or less than a third of the total of 177, are used metaphorically. By contrast, the proportions for other kinds of animals are considerably higher. Of a total of 25 mammal categories, 68 percent (17 of 25) are used as metaphors.1 For birds the figure is also 68 percent (49 of 72), and for all other vertebrate animals 52 percent (23 of 44). The fact that, by this measure, birds should be metaphorically exploited to the same extent as mammals is not so remarkable when it is recalled that birds comprise a much larger number of named categories overall than do mammals (72 versus 25).

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 311

At the same time, individual mammal categories (e.g., “buffalo,” “dog,” “porcupine”) occur in a far larger number of individual metaphorical expressions than do categories of birds, many kinds of which figure as the vehicle of just one or two metaphors. In regard to the metaphorical value of different animals, therefore, one still sees progressive reduction as one, so to speak, moves down the evolutionary scale. Before discussing factors accounting for this difference, it is worth considering how such variation in Nage metaphor compares to what is found among anglophones. For this purpose, I use Palmatier’s dictionary of animal metaphors, in which he records 1,435 English usages that expressly include the name of an animal (e.g., “busy as a bee” but not “hive of activity”). Of these, 56 percent (807) denote mammals, both wild and domestic. Birds (under which I include bats, for the sake of comparison with Nage and also in accordance with an older English usage) then account for 22 percent (321); other vertebrate animals 9 percent (133); and invertebrates 12 percent (174). Obvious differences include the higher proportion of mammals among the English metaphors (56 rather than 42 percent), the lower proportion of birds (22 as opposed to 31 percent), and the lower figure for vertebrates other than birds or mammals (9 rather than 13 percent). On the other hand, it is noteworthy that mammals and birds added together amount to over 73 percent for Nage and 78 percent for English. Of course, the comparison might be questioned on several grounds, including the fact that the considerably larger English corpus draws partly on literary sources (including Shakespeare and the Bible) spanning different historical periods. In addition, Palmatier’s focus is American English and a number of British animal metaphors are absent (see 366n3). Nevertheless, the resemblance between English and Nage metaphors is quite remarkable. In the same connection it is also noteworthy how a recent study of animal categories applied metaphorically to human personality traits and employed by American university students similarly revealed mammals to outnumber birds, fish, and insects (Sommer and Sommer 2011). Why Mammals? In view of this predominance of mammals, several factors affecting the metaphorical value of different kinds of animals might suggest themselves. For the most part, these concern relations between animals and humans – and, more particularly, Nage humans.

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

311

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 312

As hinted above, the decreasing value as one moves from mammals to invertebrates points to a phylogenetic correspondence. This would suggest that animals most employed as conventional metaphors are those most morphologically and behaviourally similar to humans – in respect to locomotion; methods of mating, reproduction, suckling of young, and care of infants; body covering; normal habitat (land versus water or air); and perhaps even facial appearance or expression and non-linguistic vocalization. By these criteria, mammals are obviously more like humans (who of course are themselves mammals) than are non-mammals. But physical similarity cannot be the whole story, not least because the animal serving as the vehicle of most Nage metaphors, forty-four in all, is the chicken, and, as this indicates, familiarity and the closely linked factor of spatial proximity may be more important determinants of an animal’s metaphorical value than is phylogenetic relatedness. Indeed, half of the Nage mammal categories comprise domestic animals, thus creatures that, like chickens, occupy much the same spaces as humans or are otherwise regularly in contact with people. The importance of familiarity was mentioned with reference to wild birds in chapter 5, where it was shown that the absence of a number of kinds from the Nage corpus is largely explained by their comparative rarity. The point gains further support from a comparison of domestic and wild mammals. Despite the two groups incorporating a roughly equal number of named categories, wild mammals account for less than a third (78) of the total 240 mammal metaphors. Monkeys and murids (or rats and mice, dhéke) provide by far the largest number of wild mammal metaphors – 32 and 17, respectively. Yet the remaining 5 categories – deer (occurring in 8 expressions), porcupine (in 5), Giant rat (4), shrew (4), and civet (8) – account for a total of just 29 metaphors, and this is far fewer than the number of expressions employing the 5 “most metaphorical” birds – the chicken (occurring in 44 metaphors), friarbird (17), bat (10), quail (8), and Spotted dove (8). Also worth recalling are the 11 expressions incorporating “snake” (nipa), the 9 employing the Tokay gecko, and the 7 incorporating the monitor lizard. Among mammals, the large number of metaphors incorporating the monkey is hardly surprising in view of the familiarity of this animal (see chapter 4) and its close resemblance to humans. Nor is the frequency with which rats and mice are employed as metaphors. Nage encounter commensal rodents with great regularity, inside settlements and especially inside dwellings, as well as in or near granaries and cultivated fields. In fact, so familiar are mice

312

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 313

and rats that to call them “wild animals” seems almost counterintuitive. Rats and mice are instructive in another respect since, in regard to metaphorical prominence, their spatial proximity and familiarity arguably compensate for their small size. Hunn (1999) has discussed the role of physical size in an animal’s overall salience and hence its prominence in folk-taxonomy, and, the exception of mice and rats aside, the Nage evidence reveals a similar correspondence between greater size and prominence in metaphor. At the same time, the size of an animal closely coincides with its status as a mammal or non-mammal and a domestic or wild creature. Thus, with few exceptions, the largest animals known to Nage are domestic mammals, the majority of which are larger than wild mammals and also larger than birds and other non-mammalian vertebrates. (The only exceptions are pythons and currently extraterritorial crocodiles and, in comparison to house cats – the smallest domestic animals – perhaps herons and eagles.) Of course, these several criteria cannot account for all differences in metaphorical use among single animal categories. For example, why bat metaphors are relatively numerous remains a question, especially since bats are nocturnal, are therefore seen less often than many diurnal animals, and hold little value for Nage, utilitarian or otherwise. On the other hand, flying foxes, the largest of bats and the kind providing the most bat metaphors, can be quite large – about the size of Nage cats – with a wingspan of well over a metre. A similar question concerns the relatively small number of deer metaphors – eight in all and thus fewer than bat metaphors and far fewer than the seventeen metaphors incorporating the friarbird – especially given the size of deer, their relative familiarity, and their status as a prized game animal (Forth 2016, 105–10). At the same time, neither the use value of an animal nor its spiritual, ritual, or mythical significance play as much a part in its employment in conventional metaphors as might be expected – a matter I explore further below. Thus far I have not distinguished between animal metaphors referring to humans and metaphorical usages with other referents. So it should be noted that the prominence of mammals in Nage metaphors generally is replicated in the occurrence of names for mammals in metaphorical names for plants, other animals, spiritual beings, artefacts, natural phenomena, and parts of the day or annual cycle. Of these metaphorical names, 56 incorporate names for mammals (47 domestic and 9 wild); 43 include names for birds; and 7 employ names for other vertebrate animals (lizards, frogs, the crocodile, and

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

313

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 314

marine turtles). Invertebrate names occur in just four metaphorical names, all of these designating plants. With the exception of “snake” (nipa), all of the incorporated terms label folk-generics. Among mammals, “water buffalo” appears in by far the highest number of metaphorical names (18 of 56), while the next highest, “dog” and “pig,” each occur in 9. Among the 9 wild mammals, “rat, mouse” (dhéke) occurs in 4. Among the 43 metaphorical names incorporating terms for birds, “chicken” appears in 14 and “friarbird” in 4. In all, 17 bird categories are used in naming plants, animals, and other nonhuman entities, but most of these occur in just 1, 2, or 3 names. Discussing English animal names metaphorically incorporating terms for other animals (e.g., “mule deer,” “zebra finch”), Palmatier (1995, x) states that the number of metaphorical names is “much larger” among fish (e.g., “catfish,” “dog fish,” “tiger shark,” “sea raven,” and many others) than among other animals. Nage presents a different picture. Apart from the fact that more metaphorical names apply to plants than to animals (55 versus 24), of the 24 metaphorically named animals exactly one half (12) are invertebrates. Only two are fish (Nos. 386, 458). Another 3 are mammals (324, 325, 483), while birds and reptiles (snakes and lizards) are the referents of 4 each (110, 312, 380, 389, and 288, 289, 387, 431). Other patterns are discernible among these metaphorical names. To begin with, animal names included in names of other animals usually denote different life forms. The only exceptions are three birds (including a bat) named after other birds (Nos. 312, 380, 389) and the mock viper (431) named with reference to a real viper. As this should suggest, taxonomic relations play hardly any role in motivating such metaphors. Bird names are more prominent as components of names of other animals than are names of creatures belonging to any other life form. “Eagle” (kua) occurs in two mammal names (Nos. 324 and 325) that, together with a variety of pig named after a frog (pake, No. 483), are the only instances of mammals named after other animals. In other instances, animals are metaphorically named after animals that are larger than themselves, and often considerably larger. This is borne out not only by the numerous invertebrates named in this way but also by the greater occurrence of mammal names, ten in all, as components of the twelve invertebrate names. (The other two are names of birds.) In all instances in which quite different creatures are named after mammals, moreover, the latter are domestic mammals and never a wild animal. “Buffalo” thus occurs in the names of three invertebrates (e.g., cico bhada, designating

314

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 315

a kind of cricket, No. 21), “pig” in four, “cat” in two, and “dog” in one. Except for “mock viper” (No. 431), “gecko goby” (458), and “frog pig” (483), names of lizards, snakes, fish, and amphibians do not occur in metaphorical animal names, and with just one exception none designates a mammal or a bird. Mammal names are also more numerous in metaphorical names applied to plants. Among kinds of plants metaphorically named after animals, twenty-nine are designated with names of mammals, both domestic and wild (e.g., “monkey’s testicles,” denoting a kind of tree), while twenty-five incorporate non-mammals. Among the latter, birds are the vehicles for fifteen names, reptiles for six, and invertebrates for four. Including several currently wild kinds (deer, porcupines, monkeys) all mammals except for bats and several murid species were brought to Flores by humans, as were chickens and domestic ducks. However, other than the two metaphors employing cattle and the two employing ducks, both introduced during the colonial period, there is no correlation between the length of time that an animal has been on the island and the extent of its present metaphorical use – either in metaphorical naming or metaphors referring to humans. Mammals that have been longer on Flores, such as pigs, porcupines, and civets, not to mention the native Giant rat, inform fewer metaphorical names than do more recent introductions, such as water buffalo, horses, cats, and perhaps goats (but see Forth 2016, 85). Clearly, then, more important in this connection are factors such as size, familiarity, and resemblance to humans. Varieties of Motivation Like differences revealed in the metaphorical use of animals of different kinds, other conclusions that can be drawn from the Nage corpus also have a more general relevance for the understanding of conventional metaphor. First, it is abundantly clear that a single animal can provide the vehicle for quite different metaphors with different referents, applying for the most part to very different human attributes or behaviours, both positive and negative. To recall just one example, reflecting different habits of the bird, the Channel-billed cuckoo can represent either a scrounger (No. 255) or a valued messenger (257). In other words, when used as metaphors, animal categories are polysemic, capable of conveying a variety of different meanings. Clearly then, it is not the category, or the whole animal considered as a gestalt, that conveys meaning but selected features of an animal – and in

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

315

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 316

the majority of cases just one or a few, so that in any single metaphor many attributes of an animal play no motivational role, even though these may be equally known to language users. To be sure, two or more metaphors sometimes draw on the same feature of the same animals – the belly of the Giant rat (Nos. 177–9), the tail of the drongo (Nos. 316, 317), and the bill of the kingfisher (Nos. 374, 375) – but this is less usual. In the same vein, named or unnamed higher order folk taxa – most notably the “folk-intermediates” evident mostly in the classification of birds (e.g., diurnal birds of prey, pigeons, and doves, the several named kinds of bats; see Forth 2016, 166–71) – reveal little coincidence with single metaphorical themes or clusters of metaphors displaying similar meanings. The only possible exceptions concern three birds of prey whose names refer metaphorically to mourners or, in one case, to the soul of a dead person (Nos. 321, 355, 377), and three metaphors employing doves or pigeons, all of which allude to human sexual or romantic attraction (Nos. 352, 353, 404). Employing birds subsumed in an intermediate taxon of “crows and crowlike birds,” metaphors incorporating the two large cuckoos (muta me and toe ou the Channel-billed cuckoo and the koel) – both parasites of crows – are identically motivated by the useful character of their calls as chronological signs (Nos. 256–9 and Nos. 382–3). Yet other birds belonging to this category – such as actual crows – have no such significance, and, in general, semantic differences among Nage animal metaphors reveal no comprehensive or systematic connection with Nage folk zoological taxonomy. This point was made previously in regard to taxonomy and symbolic uses of animals generally (Forth 2016, e.g., 272–5). Yet Nage metaphors illuminate a further difference between taxonomic treatment of animals and their metaphorical use. Whereas a taxonomy necessarily builds on general knowledge of the form and habits of different creatures, in several instances Nage are mostly unfamiliar with an animal vehicle, knowing just enough about the creature to employ the metaphor consistently and maintain an interpretation. Examples include metaphors incorporating the deer name lota (Nos. 167–8), the dolphin (463), and crustacean larvae (560). Although less pronounced than the linked properties of polysemy and selectivity, another common quality of Nage animal metaphors is synonymity – the use of very different animals to convey the same or very similar meanings. A number of instances are set out in table 2. To these might be added the numerous metaphors referring to boisterous, misbehaving children or

316

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 317

infants crying. This is not to claim that all metaphors in table 2 possess completely identical meanings. For example, “having a neck like a banana beetle” (No. 523) describes someone who is too inclined to give into requests, whereas “horse with a flexible neck” (No. 47) alludes to a more general, and somewhat more positive, attitude of compliance. Also, a good number of metaphors have meanings additional to the one synonymous with the meaning of another metaphor. Nevertheless, the various comparisons clearly show how features (and, in most instances, specifically behaviours) of very different animals can serve similar, and sometimes very similar, metaphorical ends. From the foregoing examples it should be evident how synonymy connects with the typically selective character of the metaphors – the way they focus on a single behavioural or morphological attribute that is comparable in two otherwise different animals. In other instances, this same meaning is conveyed by different single features of different animals – for example, “squeezed frog,” “gecko’s eggs,” and “eyeballs of a snail,” all describing a person with bulging eyes (see table 2). In a couple of cases synonymous or semantically similar metaphors involve phylogenetically similar animals displaying more or less identical behaviours – for instance, the squirming movements of two sorts of insect larvae (maggots and wrigglers) or flies swarming around sores and grasshoppers swarming around dog faeces (see table 2). But this does not compromise the fact that it is specific single attributes of the animals concerned that define the particular vehicles of two or more semantically similar metaphors. And as has already been demonstrated, comparable usages mostly involve very dissimilar animals, including mammals and birds, reptiles and mammals, mammals and invertebrates, and so on. Interestingly, particular physical similarities between animals belonging to different life forms also inform more or less speculative ideas Nage maintain concerning permanent transformations of one kind of animal into another – for example, bats into civets (Forth 2016, 276–94). For the present, however, I would just note that none of these transformations has motivated any animal metaphor. Given that selectivity and specificity are basic to both the polysemy of individual animal metaphors and the synonymity of a good number, a question arises as to the nature of the specific qualities selected. From discussion of individual metaphors it is abundantly clear that a large majority are motivated by empirical attributes of the animals concerned – that is, by specific elements of their physical form or behaviour. Since for the very most part

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

317

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 318

Table 2 Examples of synonymity in animal metaphors Metaphors

Common referent

Buffalo that wrecks its enclosure (13),

People who cause trouble within

cat biting its own tail (145), rat inside

their own group

a bamboo rafter (186) Horse with a soft neck (47), dog that is

A compliant person

tame with everyone (98), banana beetle (523) Pregnant mare (53), Giant rat (177, 178,

Person with a large or

179), bullfrog (474, 475)

distended belly

Horse that dances to the drum (41),

Someone who is too “quick off the

horse with its bridle removed (48),

mark,” especially when food is

bronzeback whose tail alone remains

being served

(436) Ram’s horn (62), cat’s tail (144)

A dishonest or devious person

Goat droppings (70), scattered like

A group that is disunited

civets (205), dispersed like monkeys (209) Goat on the mountain side (75),

Something that distracts a person’s

rat above (185)

attention

Dog waiting for bones (100), monkey

Person who declines to act or does

sitting halfway up a tree (227), dove

not act immediately

looking at a pool of water (401) Dog pissing at the edge of a path (93), fly alighting on sores (516)

Someone who acts inconsistently or inconstantly, e.g., quickly changing tasks

Child of a wild pig (120), child of a skink (448)

An illegitimate child

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 319

Metaphors

Common referent

Civet in a dead Arenga palm (202),

Someone who rarely leaves home

rat inside a bamboo rafter (186), grub

or mixes with others

sniffing its own arse (543) Rat without an escape hole (189),

A person who gets into a situation

earthworm unable to reenter the

from which he cannot extricate

earth (561)

himself

Mouth like a shrew (198), mouth like

Someone who talks constantly

a chicken’s anus (277) Dove looking at a pool of water (401),

Someone present at an undertaking

cockroach on the edge of a plate (532)

but who does not participate

Monitor lizard collecting black ants

A lazy person who waits to be fed

(441), tadpole feeding on dirt (484), praying mantis on top of a cotton blossom (498) Monitor’s penis (445), crocodile down

A man who engages in

by the coast (486)

indiscriminate sex

Biting like a Tokay gecko (451),

A stingy person

small wasp (501) Grasshoppers around dog faeces (492),

People immediately drawn to

flies round a sore (518)

something

Squeezed frog (476), gecko’s eggs (452), A person with bulging eyes eyeballs like a snail (565) Crawling bedbug (538), moving like

A person who moves very slowly

a slug (566) Maggot (541), mosquito larva (545)

A person who cannot keep still

Termite (535), grub (544)

A person with unseen negative qualities, who does undetected harm

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 320

these are attributes Nage themselves identify, these motivations, or the local interpretations of which they form part, might be called “cultural.” But this applies only in the most general or minimal sense of the term, and since a large majority of Nage metaphors appear to be zoologically well-founded – which is to say, in accord with what anyone with knowledge of the animals, regardless of cultural background, would agree are accurate attributes of the creatures in question – the same number would be quite readily intelligible without any detailed or comprehensive knowledge of Nage culture or society. To be clear, this is not to claim that interpretations or usual referents of a metaphor will be completely obvious simply from familiarity with an animal, even to Nage, since these must be learned in the same way as any conventional usage – as anglophones will know from first encountering certain English metaphors. Rather, the point is that the motivation of most Nage animal metaphors would be readily comprehensible to an outsider from familiarity with the creature’s empirical attributes (e.g., the urinational habit of dogs) and components of the referent to which these correspond (inconstant human activity). In contrast, a minority of animal metaphors – fewer than 20 percent (110 of the total 566) – are motivated by culturally specific ideas and practices pertaining to an animal, and although these are themselves commonly, and often obviously, grounded in the animal’s empirical attributes (the defecatory habits of flying foxes, No. 241; the lines on a skink, No. 448), knowledge of culturally particular beliefs, activities, and institutions is crucial to understanding the metaphor. Equally based in experience are the calls of birds employed as chronological signs, a kind of value that, moreover, is recognized the world over. All the same, these calls are culturally specific insofar as Nage make use of vocalizations of specific birds in the organization of specific, especially agricultural, activities; and notwithstanding their partly empirical character I further describe such motivations, like other culturally specific practices and ideas, as “non-empirical” in reference to this culturally contingent aspect. In the Nage case, the largest number of culturally specific motivations can further be specified as “utilitarian” since they concern, for example, the use of animals as bridewealth, methods of caring for animals (tethering or enclosing them), and hunting and agricultural practices. Some reflect even more particular practices involving animals, such as the customary method of slaughtering pigs (No. 127) or the children’s use of rhinoceros beetles as playthings (No. 526). On the other hand, many practical uses of

320

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 321

animals find no expression in metaphors – for example, the use of shellfish to produce lime, net-weights, and ornaments; the use of tail feathers of domestic cocks and the bright yellow plumage of the oriole as ceremonial decoration (specifically for men’s headdresses, spears, and other weapons); or keeping monkeys and less commonly civets and wild birds as pets. Of course, most animals have some use for Nage, if only because they consume almost all mammals as well as many birds, fish, frogs, two kinds of lizards, and not a few varieties of invertebrates (Forth 2016, 237–9). So I should stress that, here, I refer to specific practical uses they make of animals and how, in some instances, these uses are essential to a metaphor’s motivation. At the same time, I also count metaphors motivated by negative values of animals, specifically the many creatures that do damage to crops (or, in the case of raptorial birds, prey on chickens, or steal juice as it is collected from palms in the case of friarbirds and sunbirds) or, like poisonous snakes and biting insects, cause personal harm or annoyance. (I do so advisedly, however, since many of these values are quite directly inferable from empirical observation or experience of the creatures concerned.) Besides utilitarian values, other culturally particular factors motivating the appearance of animals in a small number of metaphors – just eight or less than 2 percent of the total of 566, and less than a quarter of all “culturally” motivated metaphors – can be called symbolic. Anthropologists commonly use “symbolic,” a useful odd-job word, to distinguish properties or associations of things that, although often traceable to empirical qualities of the thing in question, are themselves non-empirical in that observation does not confirm them and may even contradict them. Among symbolic properties informing Nage animal metaphors are the appearance of the animal in cosmological beliefs (e.g., the dung-beetle’s role in earthquakes, No. 520), in magic and taboo (e.g., “ascending snakes,” No. 427; and the witu tui bird, No. 415), and in folktales and myths (e.g., the origin of the whistler, No. 418).2 As instances of “symbolic” motivation I also include metaphorical names of spirits and similarly supernatural or mysterious entities in which the names of animals appear (e.g., “speckled fowl,” No. 297). Other motivating ideas are not symbolic in any of the foregoing respects but are no less non-empirical, especially as they are not borne out by experience of animals – as Nage themselves sometimes recognize. These ideas can also be called “symbolic” in a cognitive sense, where the term distinguishes representations that require a special kind of cognitive processing in order

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

321

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 322

to survive in the absence of any firm empirical foundation (e.g., Sperber 1975; Boyer 1994). Although sometimes received sceptically by Nage, such representations are not themselves metaphors and, as discussed in chapter 2, can only be called “beliefs.” A good example concerns the skink, a small lizard that is widely described as being able to impregnate female pigs (Forth 2016, 298–300). Many Nage doubt that this is true, yet with reference to the proposition they apply the metaphor “child of a skink” (No. 448) to a person whose biological father is unknown or undisclosed. Although apparently disputed less often, another instance of such ideas motivating a metaphor is the notion that earthworms, after emerging from the earth, are unable ever to re-enter (No. 561). Besides the metaphor, this notion also informs a magical procedure used to counter witchcraft. But by all indications, the procedure is simply a further effect of the non-empirical idea and is neither the source nor product of the metaphor. In fact, it is more likely in this case that an unfounded idea concerning an animal’s behaviour has its main source in the conventional metaphor (Forth 2016, 259–60), a possibility further suggested by the metaphor describing male rats as having only one testicle (No. 180). A connection between magic and metaphor is further revealed in the practice of tying a piece of the desiccated tail of a bronzeback snake to the tail of a horse to increase the horse’s speed (202). But rather than this practice inspiring a comparable metaphor (No. 434), both the metaphor and the magic obviously reflect the empirically well-founded status of the bronzeback as the fastest of snakes. Additional examples of non-empirical ideas motivating animal metaphors include the notion that flying foxes lack an anus (No. 241) and the claim that the Island pipe snake, or “two-headed snake” (No. 426), actually has two heads. In none of the foregoing instances is the animal identified with any sort of spirit. But in this respect they are little different from other symbolically motivated metaphors for in hardly any case does the identification of an animal with a spiritual being play a decisive part in motivating a conventional animal metaphor. As demonstrated elsewhere (Forth 1998, 2016), among the most prominent forms of Nage animal symbolism is a series of beliefs linking specific animals with spiritual beings – including free spirits (i.e., forest, water, or mountain spirits, all designated as nitu), spirits of the dead, and human souls. Free spirits, Nage say, will occasionally, incidentally, and situationally assume the form of a snake or eel, or less often a fish, crustacean, or bird – thus all non-mammals. At the same time, Nage describe wild mam-

322

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 323

mals as the domestic animals of these spirits, a conception they extend to one wild bird, the junglefowl (kata), identified as the spirits’ chickens. Further beliefs linking animals with spirits include the idea that a Brahminy kite, a bird of prey, can manifest malevolent mountain spirits out looking for human victims; a contextual identification of certain smaller birds and some invertebrates with souls of dead or living humans; and the belief that both owls and diurnal birds of prey manifest the spiritual aspect of human witches. But not a single one of these ideas plays any significant part in conventional animal metaphors. This brief digression into Nage spiritual cosmology serves to make a major point, for the virtual absence of beliefs connecting animals and spirits in the motivations of Nage animal metaphors is a signal finding of the present study. Probably the clearest proof is the fact that none of the twenty-two snake metaphors is connected with the status of snakes as the life form Nage mostly identify with free spirits. Nor are any metaphors employing eels or fish – other possible manifestations of these spirits – or any of the numerous metaphors incorporating wild mammals (the spirits’ livestock). In fact, the python, the snake Nage most often identify as a situational manifestation of a free spirit, provides the vehicle of just a single metaphor, and this focuses not on any spiritual association but solely on the snake’s well-attested swallowing ability. The same disconnection was previously remarked in reference to the Nage belief that human beings exist simultaneously as water buffalo belonging to mountain spirits (chapter 2). This notion leaves no impression in any of their thirty-three buffalo metaphors, even though according to some commentators one of these (No. 2) links the extraordinary powers of “transforming buffalo” (a metaphor for human duplicity) to a special spiritual entity, a type of “soul,” possessed exclusively by certain buffalo bulls selected for sacrifice. The metaphorical naming of a dead person’s soul, or indeed corpse, as an “earth buffalo” (No. 31) does indeed reflect spiritual ideas, as does the single metaphor employing the cuckoo-shrike, a bird Nage contextually regard as a dead human soul come to summon another to death. But this does not apply to three other bird metaphors – those employing the kite (No. 377), pigeon (No. 391), and the unspecific “sea fowl” (No. 280) – since their interpretation as references to human souls is exclusive to these particular metaphors. It also seems significant that all three occur in songs of mourning (as in fact does the cuckoo-shrike metaphor) and that in two the bird is alternatively identifiable with living mourners. But a more important point is that none of these four

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

323

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 324

bird metaphors, nor the two buffalo metaphors, implicates Nage ideas about free spirits (the beings generally known as nitu). Contrariwise, many birds that Nage do identify with spirits either do not occur as metaphorical vehicles or, where they do, are evidently not selected for their spiritual associations. Examples of the latter are the Large-billed crow, owl, and drongo – all three classified by Nage as “witch birds.” Similarly, neither of the two metaphors employing the stubtail draws on this bird’s status as an omen, and while Nage identify the whistler with souls of deceased infants, this association is evidently secondary to the myth that also motivates the metaphor (Forth 2004a, 87–8). Absent altogether from the Nage corpus are the Flores crow (another witch bird), a bird named koa ka (possibly another name for the koel, Nos. 382, 383), the deza kela (a small bird whose poignant song is thought to manifest a distressed soul), and the nightjar, a bird that, although not associated with any sort of spirit, is a bad omen for nocturnal hunters (Forth 2004a, 100–1, and see pp.17–23 for ornithological identifications of all these birds). In the same way, butterflies and spiders are not employed in any metaphors, although Nage contextually identify both as visible forms assumed by spiritual beings, including human souls. As for snakes, the only metaphor motivated by a non-empirical idea of any sort is “ascending snakes” (No. 427), which, as a reference to driftwood, reflects the magical (and therefore non-spiritual) belief that burning such wood can cause snakes to enter the house. As noted, less than a fifth of Nage animal metaphors are motivated by culturally specific uses of any sort. Details are provided in table 3, in which distinctions are further registered between different animal life forms, between utilitarian and symbolic values, and also between different sorts of utilitarian or symbolic value. Distinguishing the use of animals in exchange between affines is informative because the prescribed use of different animals as bridewealth or counter-gift can partly be viewed as symbolic, as in one sense can the value of bird vocalizations as chronological signs. Also, negative utilitarian values of animals, composing by far the commonest sort of utilitarian value, are usefully distinguished from positive values. And on the “symbolic” side, metaphorical names for spirits of otherwise non-empirical beings need to be separated from metaphors crucially informed by the part played by animals in Nage cosmology, magic, and myth. Table 3 shows how utilitarian value far outweighs symbolic value in the motivation of Nage animal metaphors. Yet a more important finding is that over

324

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 325

Table 3 Cultural factors motivating animal metaphors Mammals (in

Birds

Snakes

parentheses:

and other

domestic/wild)

vertebrates

Invertebrates

Totals

UTILITARIAN Bridewealth,

(8/0)

3

0

0

11

15

0

0

15

1

4

3

22

11

1

16

34

28

30

5

19

82

Cosmological,

5

7

1

3

15

mythical, magical

(2/3) 1

3

0

0

4

3

2

2

1

8

12

3

4

27

affinal exchange Chronological signs (Other) positive

0 14

Utilitarian value

(14/0)

Negative utilitarian

6

value

(1/5)

Total utilitarian SYMBOLIC

significance Supernatural beings or mystical entities named after animals Other non-empirical

(0/3) Total symbolic Total cultural Total metaphors

9 37 240 (162/78)

42

8

23

110

178

73

75

566

four-fifths of the metaphors are quite straightforwardly motivated by empirical factors and thus unaffected by specific cultural considerations of any kind, utilitarian or otherwise. According to a received view in anthropology, the practical value of animals and plants is the main driver in the construction of folk taxonomies. In my previous book (Forth 2016) I explain why I find this view erroneous and how it is contradicted by the Nage evidence. Applying

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

325

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 326

equally to symbolic values of animals, obviously the critique can now be extended from taxonomy to conventional metaphor. Table 3 also facilitates generalizations concerning different animal life forms. The largest number of metaphors reflecting cultural values have birds as their vehicles (over 38 percent), closely followed by mammals (34 percent). All metaphors relating to chronological signs involve birds and specifically their vocalizations. Occurring more often in metaphors contained in the lyrics of song and other poetic genres than do other animals, birds are also prominent in other metaphors reflecting symbolic values, and this too is largely attributable to values Nage attach to bird vocalizations. Invertebrates occur in a surprisingly large proportion of culturally motivated metaphors, making up 21 percent of the total. In addition, such metaphors compose over 30 percent of all invertebrate metaphors. But both figures are mostly accounted for by the negative utilitarian value of biting, pestilential, or otherwise bothersome insects; and symbolic representations of invertebrates, by contrast, have a far smaller influence. For obvious reasons, domestic mammals are the commonest vehicles of metaphors shaped by practices involving exchange between affines. On the other hand, while domesticates are the most economically valuable of animals, and furthermore provide vehicles for a very large number of metaphors generally (208, combining the totals for mammals, chickens, and domestic ducks), specific uses of domestic animals play a relatively minor part in metaphorical motivation. Accordingly, utilitarian value fails to explain why metaphors incorporating no less valuable horses and pigs are low in comparison to those employing buffalo, dogs, and chickens. And the point applies equally to wild animals, among which deer, valued with wild pigs as the most important type of game, occur as the vehicle of no more metaphors than do civets. Animal Names and Metaphor Usually combining with empirical attributes, other non-empirical factors affecting the metaphorical deployment of specific animals in conventional metaphors are aspects of an animal’s name. As discussed in previous chapters, monomials – names comprising a single lexeme (or “word”) – appear to be preferred over binomials. Monomial naming might thus be counted as another reason for the greater metaphorical employment of mammals, almost all of which are named monomially, especially as regards folk-generics (like

326

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 327

“buffalo,” “dog,” “deer,” “rat or mouse,” “civet,” and so on). Folk-specifics, on the other hand, are typically named with binomials – like wawi witu (“forest pig”), which names wild as opposed to domestic pigs. But among mammals folk-specifics are far fewer than among other life forms, and besides wawi witu the only mammal folk-specific used metaphorically is ngo ngoe, denoting what is considered a particular kind of wild cat. Quite another matter is why some animals are named monomially in the first place. Universally, monomial names are applied far more often to folk-generics than to folk-specifics or other folk biological categories (Berlin 1992), and among Nage such names are most commonly applied to mammal generics – and then, as shown just above, more consistently to domestic than to wild animals. As suggested by Berlin, these differences are likely bound up with how frequently people talk about particular animals, a variable connected not only with different practical uses made of animals but also with a variety of other values, arguably including how often an animal category is employed in conventional metaphor. A question thus arises as to the extent to which metaphorical uses of animals may contribute to the development of monomial names, but this is a topic I am unable to treat properly here. Another factor influencing the metaphorical use of particular animals is prosodic effects of animal names – the fit between the name and other elements (verbs, adjectives) of a conventional expression effected by rhyme, assonance, or alliteration. Only occasionally do Nage themselves mention the character of a name when discussing possible motivations of an animal metaphor (see No. 532). Even so, prosody is discernible in a variety of expressions and moreover occurs not just in metaphors employed in song or parallel speech but equally in metaphors heard in ordinary conversation. In many instances, prosody appears to have been more influential in the selection of other elements of an expression rather than in the selection of the animal name, especially where a metaphor appears sufficiently accounted for by empirical features of the animal or by its cultural value. The distinction is often difficult to make out, and since Nage lexemes comprise either monosyllabic or bisyllabic words, lack terminal consonants, and contain a limited number of vowels and vowel combinations, it is not always clear whether prosodic effects are influential or incidental, especially in regard to assonance. Nevertheless, around 10 percent of animal metaphors (fifty-seven of the total of 566) suggest some prosodic effects in their overall composition.3 Of these, the prosodic quality of an animal’s name appears to be a substantial factor

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

327

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 328

motivating its occurrence in about twenty expressions, though rarely it seems the sole factor. Instances include: meo déto (No. 156); ‘udu kutu (No. 171); pe’u bétu (No. 176); base … dhéke hase (No. 180); dhéke néke bétu (No. 182); ‘o’a sawi wawi (No. 225); ‘o’a to, gala bha (No. 235); ana go dhego go (No. 254); céce … ne’e, koka … mona (No. 318); bio bido (No. 326); ceka leza (No. 333); leo be’o (No. 339); bopo … tolo … mogo (No. 353); sizo io … nio (No. 355); héke muke (No. 356); lala … kata mala (No. 369); iki puki teka (No. 372); pake ne’e ate, kuza ne’e tuka (No. 481); eo ne tépo (No. 515); and ngoi ngata (552). Although less common, yet another linguistic factor evidently shaping some animal metaphors concerns what I have previously called binary composites (Forth 2016, 140–8) – standard expressions in which the names of two animals are regularly combined. One example is kutu bétu, “porcupine [and] Giant rat” (Nos. 171 and 176). Binary composites usually comprise animals that are physically similar, so their composition has a definite empirical basis. Nevertheless, such composites almost never name taxonomic categories – for example, higher order folk taxa (life forms or folk-intermediates) that systematically subsume folk-generics. Moreover, a single category can appear in more than one composite – a possibility illustrated by “goat,” which is contextually paired with three other animals. Accordingly, binary composites are typically used as components of non-taxonomic, special-purpose classifications – for example, when speaking about game animals, animals required as bridewealth, and so on. Besides the metaphorical pairing of “porcupine” and “Giant rat,” the influence of binary composites is evident in expressions incorporating “buffalo” and “horse” (Nos. 8, 37); “sheep” and “goat” (Nos. 65, 73); “goat” and “pig” (Nos. 71, 129); “goat” and “dog” (Nos. 74, 92); “dog” and “pig” (Nos. 86, 121); “deer” and “(wild) pig” (Nos. 130, 163); “Fruit dove” and “Imperial pigeon” (Nos. 353, 362); and “quail” and “Spotted dove” (Nos. 393, 405, 402, 405). Some of these usages, it should be noted, also reveal prosodic effects, for example, ‘usa ‘Ua (“goat of ‘Ua,” No. 73) and lebu Kebi (“sheep of Kebi,” No. 65), two phrases sometimes uttered in combination. And for this reason, and because of the influence of physical and behavioural factors, either in the formation of binary composites or in the motivation of animal metaphors generally, it would be misleading to count conventional metaphors reflecting composites as additional instances of metaphors motivated by cultural, linguistic, or broadly “non-empirical” values. Also requiring mention are the incidence of metaphors pairing animal categories that are not combined in standard binary composites and, con-

328

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 329

versely, how not all composites are reflected in conventional metaphors. For example, the composite ‘o’a ghoa, “monkey [and] monitor lizard” – one of two combining a mammal and a non-mammal (Forth 2016, 144; the other is “quail [and] rat,” piko dhéke) – is not attested in any metaphor, while, on the other hand, several metaphors connect “monkey,” parallelistically, with “porcupine” (No. 173), “civet” (No. 205), “cockatoo” (No. 309), “fish fry” (Nos. 233, 470), and a snake (the bronzeback, No. 235). In comparison to mammals and birds, reptiles and other non-mammals are included in fewer binary composites, a circumstance that would explain why no metaphors reflect standard pairings of animals of these kinds. Several composites combine invertebrate categories, and Nage employ three of these as conventional metaphors (metu mule, No. 508; emu hale, No. 519; and maju mela, Nos. 536, 537), doing so moreover without separating the components with verbs or modifiers as is usually done in metaphorical applications of mammal and bird composites. Finally, three metaphors, all employing birds, are partly motivated by the homonymy of the birds’ names and phenomena alluded to in their respective interpretations – specifically, ana go (No. 254), manu miu (No. 283), and kuku raku (No. 417). Although not reproduced in any metaphor, another possible example is the full name of the bushchat, tute péla, specifically the second component of the name in regard to the referent of one metaphor that employs this bird (identified simply as tute, No. 251). However, whether dealing with homonymy, monomial naming, prosody, or binary composites, linguistic effects, wherever they are evident in Nage animal metaphors, are virtually always found in conjunction with other motivational factors – either empirical features or cultural associations of the animal vehicle – and, as the interpretations of Nage commentators would suggest, are influenced far more by these than by properties of the animal’s name. Prosody especially should be considered as a factor contributing to the memorability of metaphorical expressions, yet it is clearly not the only factor hypothetically contributing to the survival of conventional expressions. Generalizations and Further Interpretations Several general features of Nage animal metaphors are now well established. Among these is a use of specific attributes of animal kinds to make statements about equally specific features of other things – most notably, of course, human beings. In addition, in the majority of cases these attributes

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

329

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 330

are empirical, comprising particular morphological or behavioural features that, I would stress, are typically available to a panhuman observation of the creatures in question. The remainder are then motivated by non-empirical, culturally specific attributes of animals, relating either to practical uses of specific animals or ideas about animals reflecting specific cosmological or other values of the sort that have generally been called symbolic. A review of motivational factors has also revealed a general incompatibility or inconsistency between, on the one hand, the use of animals in conventional metaphors and, on the other, cultural values attributed to the same animals, especially in Nage spiritual cosmology. Partly illuminating this phenomenon is the specific and selective character not only of metaphorical value but also both cosmological and utilitarian values of animals – that is, the fact that all these values reflect a limited number of an animal’s features, and often just one (e.g., the shape of its tail, colour of its pelage or plumage, its nocturnal habit, the significance of its calls, or the practical use made of some part of an animal). In this respect, the relative absence of cultural values reflected in the motivation of animal metaphors might be attributed to a tendency to select different features of the same animal when it is used to construct a metaphor and when it serves other cultural purposes. But there is evidently more to the matter than this, and to reach a fuller solution we need to treat symbolic and utilitarian uses of animals separately. The first thing to recall is that the number of metaphors reflecting utilitarian values is far higher than those reflecting an animal’s symbolic significance – in Nage cosmology, mythology, and the like. As regards utilitarian values, differential selectivity of particular traits does indeed go some way to explaining the relative absence of such values as motivation for conventional metaphors. And this is largely because the practical uses to which particular animals are put – for example, as raw materials or items of exchange – are limited and are far exceeded by numerous other features available for use as vehicles of conventional metaphor. Here it should also be recalled that, of the several varieties of utilitarian significance distinguished in table 3, it is an animal’s negative value that informs the greatest number of metaphors, over 40 percent (thirty-four of eighty-two). Symbolic uses of animals, by contrast, are subject to rather fewer restrictions, but there are other differences as well. As demonstrated, beliefs linking animals with spirits are virtually absent from the motivation of Nage animal metaphors. To be sure, animal categories occur in a small number

330

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 331

of metaphorical names denoting spiritual beings, among which might be counted “earth buffalo,” denoting the soul or corpse of a dead person. But in these cases, a spirit (or something else neither clearly human nor animal, like the “miu fowl,” No. 296, and “highland quail,” No. 397, both manifest only as mysterious sounds) is of course the referent of the expression rather than a factor in the motivation of the metaphor, applying to a human or anything else. As for other symbolically motivated metaphors, the value of the animal reflects its significance in Nage myth, magic, or taboo, where the creature in question has no association with spirits. In view of the prominence of animals both in Nage representations of spiritual beings and in their conventional metaphors, the fact that spiritual associations of animals play virtually no part in motivating the metaphors may appear puzzling. The circumstance might seem all the more curious when it comes to animals, such as snakes, that Nage describe as phenomenally manifesting otherwise anthropomorphous spirits. Yet a solution can be found in cognitive differences between two sorts of representations, particularly those discussed in chapter 2 distinguishing metaphor from belief. For example, a person working inconstantly leads Nage to think of a urinating dog, and does so by virtue of the conventional metaphor – a standard representation. The metaphor might also cause people observing a urinating dog to think about people they know. But in either case, the similarity is recognized simply as a resemblance, so that speaking of someone as a urinating dog is understood as a figurative statement, a conscious and deliberate, though socially and discursively useful, fiction. By contrast, someone observing a Brahminy kite flying unusually high and circling without descending may well interpret this phenomenon, in accordance with a general belief, as a malevolent mountain spirit in search of a human victim (Forth 1998, 151–2; see also No. 377), just as an owl calling unusually close to a dwelling, especially one containing someone who is seriously ill, is likely to be interpreted as signalling an imminent death (Forth 2004a, 69). Or to take another case, a person coming across an unusually large or odd-coloured eel will be inclined to see this as a manifestation of a water spirit, the leader of a group of such spirits or the spiritual “guardian” of the water, which he or she will therefore avoid harming or disturbing (Forth 2016, 218). As is clear from previous chapters, the place of eels and owls in conventional metaphor is insignificant, and while metaphors involving kites are somewhat more numerous, none definitely reflects the possible spiritual significance of

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

331

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 332

these birds. But the more general point is that Nage encountering the same creatures will recognize, if only as a potentiality, real connections between the animal and a spirit, so for Nage these ideas are anything but metaphoric, figuring instead as beliefs informing, if only situationally, people’s relations with the animals, including the observance of taboos and ritual practices intended to counteract negative consequences of encounters. It therefore follows that hypothetical expressions like “high-flying kite” or “hooting owl nearby” would not be suitable as conventional metaphors, especially if applied to a person in direct address, because the spiritual associations of the images they convey would obviously compromise any metaphorical intent. If conveying any meaning at all, the statements would very likely be taken literally – as implying either that the person was a spirit (which for Nage would actually convey no definite significance) or that he or she was a witch, an inference that could have serious social consequences.4 The place of animal metaphors in social relations is discussed in the next chapter. For the present another, possibly related, difference deserves attention. In metaphors, mammals and especially domestic mammals predominate, while in (non-metaphorical) spiritual representations mammals are in fact underrepresented, and accordingly, snakes, birds, other non-mammalian vertebrates, and even invertebrates are more prominent. Spiritual representations incorporating mammals are in fact confined to a view of wild mammals as spirits’ livestock and the belief that the spirit of a witch can assume the form of a rat or mouse. (Buffalo are associated with spirits only to the extent that humans are thought to exist as spirit buffalo and, according to a piece of specialist knowledge, sacrificial buffalo are as it were contextual embodiments of buffalo-owing spirits.) In part, this contrast of life forms is consistent with a view of spirits generally, and especially free spirits and witches, as having no proper place inside human settlements, which for a large part is where domestic animals also reside. But the zoological opposition further reflects a cosmological principle whereby spirits, both free spirits and human souls, are conceived as unseen but essentially human-like beings that very occasionally become visible or otherwise phenomenally manifest only in the form of creatures that are most dissimilar to humans. As demonstrated, the predominance of mammals in conventional metaphors, on the other hand, largely corresponds to their greater physical similarity to humans. In addition, the contrast with spirits and their incidental manifestations as very non-human animals arguably accords with a Nage view of spirits of all kinds as fundamentally in-

332

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 333

verted beings (see note 4), a point documented at length in other writings (Forth 1998; Forth 2016). Why Animals? While it is sufficiently clear why mammals should predominate in Nage metaphor, yet to be addressed is the larger question of why animals at all and, more specifically, why animals should occupy such a premier place as vehicles of conventional metaphors not just among Nage but the world over. Properties that make mammals better suited for metaphorical deployment than other animals – especially the many ways mammals palpably resemble humans in regard to morphology, methods of mating and reproduction, and so on – have some bearing on the metaphorical value of animals in general. But there is rather more to say, and a place to begin is differences between animals, on the one hand, and non-animals – plants, inanimate objects, artefacts – on the other. Unlike the latter, animals are by definition animated and, like humans, are capable of self-directed movement – regardless of how they differ from humans in their locomotory abilities. Also like humans, animals eat and defecate, and most species produce sounds. Of course, movement and sound are also properties of some inanimate things, like flowing water, wind, and fire. But owing to their existence as discrete individuals as well as the importance of movement for their survival, animals not only move but also engage in a variety of acts, activities, and behaviours, many of which evince specific aims and suggest definite purposes. What is more, animal actions have immediately observable effects on other things, including other animals, vegetation and inorganic components of the natural environment, and human artefacts (buildings, enclosures, and the like). Without suggesting that non-human animals are completely identical to humans in these respects, it is therefore no coincidence that the majority of animal metaphors – in Nage, English, and other languages – refer to humans acting or behaving in specific ways or displaying particular characters. And it is equally clear how plants, for example, do not serve nearly so well, even though by virtue of their ability to reproduce, grow and spread, and wither and die, and because of their visual and olfactory qualities, plants too can refer metaphorically to humans. In addition to bodily features linking animals and humans, it is to a large degree the distinctive ways in which different animals not only move but also

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

333

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 334

act or behave, both visibly and vocally, that, for people everywhere, distinguish one kind of animal from another. Indeed, distinctive physical attributes or behaviour are, in whole or in part, often the focus of animal names. Nage examples include ngo ngoe, the onomatopoeic name of a wild cat, and “sharp wing,” referring to a falcon, as well as many other Nage bird names (Forth 2004a, 17–23), while for English we might recall “roadrunner,” “rattlesnake,” “bullhead,” and many more. Apart from specific morphological or behavioural attributes of animals that can readily be compared with attributes in humans, the manifest variety of such attributes suggests another reason animals make better metaphors than does just about anything else. Especially in view of the application of animal metaphors to a variety of human behaviours, the sheer variety of animal kinds and, furthermore, variation among individual animals of the same kind with respect to age, size, and physical condition, facilitates a ready, almost ineluctable, mapping of animal variation onto human variation. Something similar might be claimed for the variety of plant species. But apart from the fact that the world contains many more species of animals than plants (though some three-quarters of the former are insects), as already shown the unequivocally greater metaphorical potential of animals is easily accounted for by factors of manifest resemblance. The foregoing observations may recall Lévi-Strauss’s analysis of totemism, which he construed as involving “metaphor” in the Jakobsonian sense. But there are important differences. First, whereas Lévi-Strauss treated totemism as pertaining to segmentary groups composing a social whole, animal metaphors, among Nage and elsewhere, refer for the most part to distinctive and often temporary and situational features of human individuals. In fact, as is shown in the next chapter, only a minority of Nage animal metaphors refer to whole social categories (gender, social ranks, age classes, and the like). Second, in Lévi-Strauss’s theory, animal totems reflect a system of differences, so that what links people to totemic species is resemblance between a series of human groups on the one hand and plants or animals on the other. Accordingly, whereas conventional metaphors turn largely on recognizable resemblances between animals and their human referents, Lévi-Strauss treated resemblance between single totems and single groups, and any putative continuity between these (e.g., the notion that members of totemic groups descend from or share kinship with their totem) as being decidedly secondary and unnecessary to the relation. At the same time, whereas Lévi-Strauss’s theory of totemism has been criticized for its dismissal of the substantial (some

334

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 335

might say “ontological”) relations between individual totems and associated human collectivities, at least one feature of his model – the diversity of animal or otherwise natural kinds, inspiring what may be described as a metaphorical application of “metaphor” – somewhat ironically turns out to be more straightforwardly applicable to conventional animal metaphors. Although the prominence of animals in metaphor is mostly explained by a combination of perceptible resemblance between animals and humans and differences between contrasting animal kinds, one should not lose sight of the multifaceted practical, intellectual, and emotional interests animals hold for humans in all societies. With respect to resemblance we should also recall the fact that metaphor requires not only similarity between items in the source and target domains but also a degree of dissimilarity. This follows from the consciously figurative – one might even say deliberately fictional – character of metaphor, which requires a sufficient disparity between vehicle and referent for a particular kind of meaning to be conveyed (cf. Morgan 1993, 129). It would therefore make little sense using “sparrow” or “crow” as a metaphor for a pigeon since this would far more likely to be taken literally and so result in miscommunication. (Calling pigeons “rats of the air,” by contrast, is quite patently metaphorical – as is calling a known simpleton a “genius.”) Among animals known to Nage I can find none that is not metaphorically exploited, or is exploited less than others, because it is too similar to possible human referents or is too close spatially or too familiar. The monkey makes the point in reverse for not only is this animal one of the commonest metaphorical vehicles, but, despite the numerous ways in which monkeys closely resemble humans – a fact Nage themselves often remark upon – monkeys are nevertheless classified as “animals” (ana wa) and definitely not as “human beings” (kita ata; Forth 2016, 130–1). In other words, for Nage, animals of all kinds occupy the same side of a great ontological divide that separates them categorically from humans. And even though a greater similarity of some animals to human beings, most notably of course mammals, partly explains their greater metaphorical use, they are all equally animals and so sufficiently different from humans to serve as metaphors. Recalling the cognitivist argument that certain ideas are appealing and survive because they involve an ideal balance of intuitive and counter-intuitive elements and so achieve a “cognitive optimum” (Boyer 1994, 121–3), it may therefore be supposed that, in regard to resemblance and difference, animals exhibit a similarly superior ratio of human and non-human qualities.

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

335

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 336

9 Animal Metaphors in Social and Ontological Perspective

The previous chapter focuses on properties of animals motivating their use as metaphors. In this chapter I focus on the human referents of animal metaphors and thus their use in social interaction and relations among humans. After looking at the metaphors from both sides, as it were, I conclude with a discussion of what conventional animal metaphors can tell us about human-animal relations and whether they point to any distinctive ontological features in Nage thinking about animals. Connected with this last question, I show how a study of Nage animal metaphors contributes to recent anthropological discussion of ontological variation among human societies generally. Human Referents and the Use of Animal Metaphor in Social Relationships It is already clear that the majority of Nage animal metaphors have human beings as their referents. More specifically, 444 of the total of 566, or over 78 percent, do so. Among these I count five metaphors interpreted as referring to deceased human souls, most of which can also refer to living humans (specifically mourners). Almost 79 percent (189 of 240) of mammal metaphors refer to humans, thus virtually the same as the proportion for all animals. By contrast, bird metaphors reveal a slightly lower figure – just over 72 percent (129 of 178) – while the figures for other non-mammals and invertebrates are both higher (respectively, over 84 and 88 percent). Similarly, the proportion of wild mammal metaphors referring to humans (69 of 78, or

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 337

over 88 percent) is higher than metaphors incorporating domestic animals (120 of 162, or 74 percent). Accounting for these variations, however, is the higher number of birds and mammals, especially domestic mammals, employed in metaphors applied to other entities (plants, other animals, times of the day, artefacts, etc.), and, in absolute numbers, mammal and bird metaphors referring to people (317, or over 71 percent of the total of 444) still exceed metaphors incorporating other kinds of animals. As mentioned previously, only a minority of Nage animal metaphors are used self-referentially. The majority are expressed either in the second person, thus in direct address, or in the third. Where animal metaphors function as proverbs, on the other hand, they refer of course to no one in particular but instead advertise general ideas about humans or the human condition. Sometimes proverbs entail prescriptions, asserting, with reference to comparable features of animals, how people should live (e.g., Nos. 144 and 206, regarding the tails of cats and civets). But however employed, most metaphors possess a definite moral import and in this way offer insight into Nage social values. As noted in chapter 2, a majority of animal metaphors express a negative evaluation of their human referent, registering disapproval or being used derisively, in venting anger or in friendly banter as well as conventional exchanges between the sexes in the song genre called pata néke. This generally negative quality appears to bear out the commonly expressed view (though one based mostly on English metaphors) that “the great majority [of animal metaphors] are negative and pejorative” (Goatly 2006, 25; see also Sommer and Sommer 2011, who speak of “animal metaphors for human personality” as being “mostly uncomplimentary”). In some non-Western societies, however, animal metaphors appear to be proportionally more complimentary, at least contextually, as Olatéju (2005, 380) has shown for the Yoruba. And in any case, one needs to be more specific. By no means all metaphors in the Nage corpus reflect negatively on human referents. As with animal metaphors in English, a minority refer to positive qualities, while a larger number are neutral or ambiguous. “Neutral” metaphors include usages describing a relationship, practice, or institution – such as the several, mostly incorporating chickens, that distinguish human males and females or refer to relations between wife-giving and wife-taking affines (or, indeed, humans and god, No. 266). They also include many metaphors contained in proverbs, though where a proverb possesses a prescriptive aspect (e.g., “living like a porcupine,” No. 172, or “not living like a junglefowl,”

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

337

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 338

No. 367) a positive or negative sense is readily apparent. Metaphorical names for human body parts are by definition neutral. By contrast, metaphors that describe a person’s appearance by reference to a physical feature more or less peculiar to that individual (e.g., having hair like a fantail’s tail or a cockatoo’s crest, or having eyeballs like gecko’s eggs) are often used critically or derisively. Yet they can also be employed in a purely practical, descriptive way – for example, when distinguishing a person from others – and in most cases I have therefore classified them as neutral or ambiguous (two terms between which, in the present context, I do not attempt to distinguish). As these remarks should suggest, determining in which of these three categories a given metaphor fits has sometimes proved challenging, not least because a single expression can have more than one application and because interpretations sometimes combine negative and positive implications. For example, the metaphorical reference to a person having the character of the much reviled Russell’s viper (No. 430), probably the most feared of creatures known to Nage, is negative insofar as the person inspires fear in others but is also partly positive in that it implies boldness and a masterful personality. Nevertheless, in the majority of cases the determination has been reasonably straightforward. In virtually all instances evaluations have been made on the basis of informant commentary and observation of expressions in use, and if occasionally categorization has been arbitrary, this is unlikely to have affected the overall result. Results of this analysis are presented in table 4. As the table shows, over 10 percent of Nage animal metaphors are generally positive while nearly 27 percent can be classified as neutral. This then leaves a sizeable majority, around 63 percent, that are negative or uncomplimentary to human referents. Apart from lending support to the generalizations of other authors, the fact that over six in ten of the Nage metaphors refer to human traits they consider negative could be taken to reflect a generally negative attitude towards animals and even as symptomatic of a view of non-human animals as morally inferior to humans. However, the inference requires qualification. To the extent that Nage often speak negatively about non-human animals, characterizing them as lacking things they value – like houses, clothing, tools, fire, knowledge of cooking, or, in a word, “culture” (Forth 2016, 59–60) – then indeed Nage can be said to regard animals as inferior. As mentioned in chapter 1, they certainly regard humans and animals as very different sorts of beings, so that someone conceived as behaving like an animal or looking

338

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 339

like an animal is usually not looking or behaving well. Nevertheless, some qualities of animals are obviously considered positive, at least to the extent that comparable qualities of humans are also considered positive. What is more, attributes or behaviours that Nage consider undesirable in human beings are not necessarily considered undesirable, or equally undesirable, in an animal. An example is our eponymous metaphor concerning the urinating dog, which Nage apply to inconstant or inconsistent humans. Such conduct is definitely disapproved in a person. Yet Nage do not consider the way dogs urinate to be bad either for dogs or for humans; it is simply the way dogs are. As it happens, most dog metaphors, like Nage animal metaphors in general, do indeed cast their human referents in a negative light. Yet one needs to recall the typical specificity and selectivity of metaphors, the fact that they focus on just one or a few attributes of the animal vehicle; hence it cannot be assumed that qualities of an animal highlighted either in individual metaphors, or even the totality of metaphors incorporating a given animal, will be representative of any overall evaluation of that animal. Indeed, by all indications they are not. Thus not only dogs but many other animals Nage value, not just for utilitarian but for intellectual and affective reasons as well, provide vehicles for metaphors that, in the large majority of cases, reveal a negative evaluation of their human referent. On the other hand, animals Nage do not value so highly, including some they consider mostly or entirely negative, are nevertheless employed in metaphors with neutral or even positive human referents. Thus the monkey appears in four positive metaphors as does the porcupine, both animals and especially the first being known mostly for the serious damage they do to crops, and complimentary references to people can be found even among metaphors incorporating snakes, fish, and invertebrates. In general, therefore, differences in positive values that Nage attach to an animal appear not to correspond to differences in the degree to which metaphors employing that animal refer positively to attributes of human beings. There is, however, a qualification. If the figures for “positive” and “neutral” metaphors listed in table 4 are added together and then compared to the figures for negative metaphors, a somewhat different picture emerges. For the ratio of negative to positive and neutral usages then accords quite well with an animal’s overall value in Nage life. In particular, the figure for horses is 1:1, for pigs 5:3, and for buffalo and dogs 13:7. No other mammal begins to approach these ratios, except for the porcupine; however, the total number of metaphors incorporating this animal – just four – is very low.

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

339

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 340

Table 4 Human values in animal metaphors: life forms and

selected individual categories Total of

Metaphors

Generally

Generally

Neutral,

all

referring

negative

positive

ambiguous

metaphors

to humans

162

120

85

11

24

Buffalo

33

20

13

2

5

Horse

26

24

12

4

8

Cattle

2

2

2

0

0

Sheep

6

6

6

0

0

Goat

16

13

11

0

2

Dog

35

26

19

1

6

Domestic mammals (total)

Pig

25

16

10

4

2

Cat

19

13

12

0

1

Wild

78

69

55

9

5

mammals (total) Deer

8

6

5

1

0

Porcupine

5

4

2

2

0

Giant rat Rat, mouse

4

4

4

0

0

17

13

10

0

3

Shrew

4

4

4

0

0

Civet

8

7

5

2

0

32

31

25

4

2

All mammals

240

189

140

20

29

Birds

178

128

46

14

68

Monkey

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 341

Other

Total of

Metaphors

Generally

Generally

Neutral,

all

referring

negative

positive

ambiguous

metaphors

to humans

73

61

43

9

9

Snakes

22

16

12

2

2

Lizards

19

16

12

2

2

vertebrates (total)

Fish

12

12

5

4

3

Frogs

11

10

7

1

2

5

4

4

0

0

Invertebrates

75

66

49

4

13

Grand totals

566

444

279

47

119

Crocodile

Cats, on the other hand, produce a contrary result, as all but one of the thirteen cat metaphors with human referents are negative and none is positive – in spite of the value these animals hold as mousers and a Nage conception of house cats as quite special creatures, indicated by several taboos and other usages (Forth 2016, 103–4). The figures for deer are also surprising in view of their status as the most highly prized of game animals. Just one of the six deer metaphors is positive while the remainder are all negative; but the total for this animal is also low (the same as for virtually extra-territorial sheep). This too is a surprising result, and yet another surprise comes with the figures for fish and geckos. Just 5 of the 12 fish metaphors refer negatively to humans, while 3 are neutral and 4 are positive (thus yielding a ratio of 5:7, higher than those for all mammals). Similarly, 3 of the 7 metaphors employing the Tokay gecko are negative while 2 of the remaining 4 are positive and 2 are neutral. (Metaphors employing other lizards as vehicles – monitors and skinks – are negative without exception.) Bird metaphors require a separate mention since, in comparison with metaphors incorporating all other life forms, the number with negative human referents is low, less than 36 percent of the total of 128. By the same

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

341

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 342

token, the ratio of negative to positive and neutral metaphors combined is just over 1:2 (46:82). Even so, the proportion of bird metaphors with positive referents (11 percent) is only slightly higher than that for all mammals (10.6 percent) and is actually lower than that for wild mammals (13 percent), and it is accordingly the number of neutral referents that is high (over 53 percent). The relatively fewer negative associations of bird metaphors can then be attributed to the relatively high number that refer to human body parts, bodily features (long-leggedness, short stature), hair styles (compared to birds’ crests and tails), and vocal qualities, the majority of which are neither clearly positive nor negative. Animal Metaphors in Social Use Since nearly four-fifths of Nage animal metaphors refer to human characteristics, behaviours, and the like, questions naturally arise as to how far such usages reflect features of Nage social life and values. In fact, many metaphors instance one or more general principles or themes of Nage society. In the last chapter, I demonstrated how animal metaphors are often synonymous or at least very similar in meaning to one or more others. Pairs or clusters of synonymous metaphors necessarily express common social themes, but only in a relatively small measure do synonymous metaphors compose these themes. As mentioned in chapter 2, only a minority of animal metaphors refer to whole categories of people – for example, social statuses, the genders, age classes, or named populations. Exceptions include “ancient horns” (very old people), “Nage dog(s)” (Nage men in general), “cock” and “hen” (male and female infants), “young cock” (a young man whose voice is breaking), “young hen” (a prospective bride), “lost fowl” (deceased wife-takers), and “god’s chickens” (humans in general). In addition, “buffalo” and “dog” distinguish people of high and low rank, respectively (see Nos. 10, 20, 91), as somewhat less definitely do “Giant rat” and “mouse (or rat)” (Nos. 182, 184). Other metaphors with a collective human reference include “Kebi sheep,” “‘Ua goats,” “Geo cats,” and Réndu monkeys,” the first pair applying to all inhabitants of two regions, and the second pair more specifically to the men of those regions. To these one might add the numerous metaphors applied to young children whose behaviour adults find bothersome and the few that implicitly refer to people of low social standing. Nevertheless, the large

342

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 343

majority of Nage animal metaphors describe individuals with reference to often very specific features distinguishing them, mostly situationally and temporarily, from other people. The majority of such metaphors can be used for either men or women. Some 15 percent refer exclusively or primarily to one gender or the other, with the largest number (forty-four, or 10 percent of the total of 444) referring to men, and far fewer (twenty-three) referring to women. These figures do not provide the whole picture, as more detailed study would likely reveal a greater application of otherwise gender-neutral metaphors to one gender or the other as well as differences in the gender of speakers. Even so, it is noteworthy how the greater incidence of animal metaphors referring to males replicates the findings of Sommer and Sommer’s (2011) study of animal metaphors employed by American students. Writing on South American animal metaphors, Gary Urton (1985) similarly remarks how the majority of these, including macaws among the Bororo, “overwhelmingly” apply specifically to men. On the other hand, the representations of which Urton speaks, it is important to note, are generally not conventional metaphors but “metaphor” in an extended, structuralist sense (see chapter 2). Whether the usages are sex-specific or not, several factors affect the incidence of Nage men applying metaphors to women or vice versa, particularly in direct address. For one thing, males may properly use expressions considered coarse, especially ones relating to sexual activity, only in the presence of marriageable females, notably matrilateral cross-cousins and other women of the category li ana, and brothers’ wives (ipa). Both relationships allow, even encourage, special licence in interpersonal dealings. An exception to this may be the genre named pata néke (see chapter 2), where male and female singers not specifically related in these ways direct sexually suggestive metaphors (e.g., No. 234, concerning masturbating monkeys) to all members of the opposite gender – especially since address in pata néke is collective rather than individual, so that potentially offensive language need not be taken personally. Nevertheless, when I brought this up, Nage insisted that, in this context too, a man should not employ sexually suggestive metaphors except when addressing women who are unrelated, or who could be married or engaged in a sexual relationship. Whatever the case, the Nage corpus does not bear out Goatly’s (2006, 28) observation that “sex specific pejorative metaphors” tend to refer to females, a claim the author illustrates entirely with English usages. And in

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

343

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 344

this respect it is noteworthy that several Nage metaphors employing female animals as vehicles (e.g., Nos. 18, 69, 272, 273) can be applied to men as well as women and that one (No. 271) refers to men exclusively. Of the 444 animal metaphors applying to humans, I count sixty (or 13.5 percent) that refer to physical features or conditions – mostly facial or bodily appearance but also vocal characteristics and, in one instance, body odour (“smelling like a shrew,” No. 199). Accordingly, nearly nine in ten refer to human behaviours, actions, characters, or circumstances. Among those pertaining to physical attributes, only two – “fine stallion” (denoting a handsome man) and “face like a junglefowl cock” (referring to a striking or animated male face) – are positive. Curiously perhaps, with the arguable exception of “hair that looks like it has been licked by a snake” (No. 419), none refers to an attractive woman – described literally as a “good, fine woman” (bu’e modhe). Many other metaphors describing physical appearance are neutral, not clearly expressing either approval or disapproval, but as accords with the finding for Nage metaphors in general, the majority can be classified as negative. A distinction of a different sort concerns several uncomplimentary usages advertising human physical traits that appear purely notional. For example, describing a man as “having only one testicle like a male rat” (No. 180) does not require a perception or conviction that the referent really is a monorchid. Nor for that matter does it definitely entail a view of male rats as typically exhibiting this condition (Forth 2016, 259). In a similar vein, accusing someone of having a face like a monkey (No. 211) or looking like a cat gripping a chicken in its mouth (No. 149) are intended less as factual assessments of people’s appearance than as expressions of the speaker’s feelings about the addressee. As discussed in individual commentaries, such expressions are mostly employed in more or less friendly banter, especially among men. But this is not to suggest that Nage do not similarly employ metaphors that appear better grounded in observation – for example, when teasing someone about having a large belly (like a Giant rat’s or a pregnant mare), a raucous laugh (like the harsh cry of a dollarbird), or large buttocks (like a tree ant). At the same time, and unlike the foregoing examples, many metaphors of this sort – whether used to convey disapproval or serving a largely descriptive end – refer not to a more or less permanent physical feature but describe a situational disposition or condition. Instances include describing someone bending over to lift a heavy object as “having a waist like a dog shitting” (No.

344

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 345

109), a person with a covered head as looking like “a large owl” (No. 389), or someone who is out of breath as “a goby (fish) in shallow water” (No. 465). Of metaphors referring to humans behaving in specific ways or finding themselves in particular circumstances – thus by far the majority – most suggest one or more of a series of social and moral themes. Communicating either disapproval or (in a far smaller number of instances) approval of the trait or condition in question, some of these themes are quite expectable as they express values most human societies are likely to hold – for instance, disapproval of dishonesty, duplicity, or deceit (three similar attributes I treat together); disobedience and insubordination; undue aggressiveness or pugnacity; and actions considered ill-mannered or coarse. Other metaphors, however, are rather more interesting since, by virtue of their associated themes and the number of usages reflecting a theme, they suggest special social concerns bound up with more specific features of Nage social life. Sexuality might be thought a thoroughly expectable human concern. Nevertheless it is worth noting that at least forty usages refer to undesirable sexual proclivities or relationships – for example, calling a man a “Nage dog” or a “crocodile” or describing him as a “ram striking everything with its horns,” or calling a woman or man a “hen that lays eggs in various places.” Sexual metaphors are, of course, also typical of the genre named pata néke, where men and women in turn tease or deride members of the opposite gender. Among the forty sexual metaphors are several that more specifically concern illicit unions or misconduct by marriage partners; examples include Nos. 10, 51, 55, 56, 87, 91, 178, 499, 502, and 509. Not always relating to sex or marriage, another cluster of metaphors, some half a dozen or so, concern exceptional and largely disapproved relations among kin. Among these are usages advertising excessive emotional attachment of parents to children (No. 14) or of children to parents (No. 466), and the undesirable conditions of being an only child (No. 361), a child of unknown paternity (No. 448), or a person with few kin (No. 514). Somewhat contrary to expectation, Nage appear to have no animal metaphors for orphans, nor in regard to sex and marriage, any pertaining to rape or, exclusively, to adultery. Incest in a broad sense is covered by metaphors employing the monitor lizard and the crocodile (Nos. 445, 486). Nage society is organized into kin groups that, at various levels of segmentation, act corporately (especially in respect to land tenure), require mutual assistance between members, and further operate as units of marriage

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

345

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 346

exchange and affinal alliance. Therefore it is hardly surprising that a number of metaphors refer to attitudes or behaviours that either promote or disrupt or fail to maintain group unity and solidarity. Two usages contrast buffalo dung (No. 6) and goat droppings (No. 70) as references to group unity and disunity, respectively, while another two (Nos. 205, 209) similarly express disapproval of groups that fail to hold together when confronting a common adversary or adversity. Exemplified by “buffalo that wrecks its enclosure” (No. 13), “cat biting its own tail” (No. 145), and two rat metaphors (Nos. 186, 187), another four expressions more specifically refer to people who cause trouble within their own group, and yet another – “frog of two rivers” (No. 479) – describes someone with divided loyalties. As some of these usages reveal, Nage often speak of social groups, and especially kin or descent groups, as spatial entities and, more specifically, as houses. “House” (sa’o) can therefore denote a lineage or a unit of affinal alliance, and, in the same vein, “big house, long gallery” (sa’o méze, téda léwa) describes a more inclusive group of relatives. In itself metaphoric and indeed instancing a cross-culturally widespread conceptual metaphor, this identification further illuminates animal metaphors expressing disapproval of people who fail to maintain a single, stable residence; who change residence unnecessarily; and who move about in an irregular or disorderly manner. Symptomatic of a value of general and quite distinctive import for the constitution of Nage society, over a dozen metaphors attest to these closely linked themes. Among these are usages expressing disapproval of a wandering, unrestrained lifestyle, three of which employ the horse as the vehicle (Nos. 36, 46, 50) – presumably because, in contrast to other animals, horses can be and should be trained to behave in an orderly way. On the other hand, two usages referring to unreliable or unpredictable people (Nos. 87, 103), in one instance a wife, use the dog, another trainable animal, as their vehicle. Further examples describe excessively mobile people as “monkeys jumping from tree to tree” (No. 223), and a man who moves around a lot and is therefore difficult to locate as a “wild pig” (No. 134) – a usage also connoting irregular sexuality (see “child of a wild pig,” No. 120). Other metaphors of this general sort employ the irregular egg-laying habits of certain hens (Nos. 272–4) or contrast porcupines and junglefowl (Nos. 172, 367) as creatures which, respectively, occupy permanent dens and do not maintain regular roosting sites. Another calls on the dolphin (No. 463) to characterize a person who is given to disap-

346

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 347

pearing and suddenly reappearing or whose presence in a place is irregular. And yet another compares people who, indecisively, move their family several times before finally settling down to a “cat that moves its kittens” (No. 151). In several respects Nage also conceive of a marriage, a union sanctioned by the payment of bridewealth, as a house. Accordingly, partners in extramarital liaisons are depicted as “goats in undergrowth” and “pigs rooting in vines” (Nos. 71, 129) – thus animals engaged in animal behaviour in places outside of settlements and certainly outside of houses. After a marriage is fully transacted, a woman typically moves to her husband’s village, where she should remain, returning to the house of her parents only on special occasions when she formally visits as a member of her husband’s group, thus as a “wife-taker.” Metaphors expressing disapproval of behaviour contravening this norm are “dog from Labo” (No. 87) and “wasp piercing vegetables” (No. 499), while virtually the same wasp metaphor condemns an inconstant male suitor who “flits” from one prospective wife to another (No. 502). By no means are married couples always expected to have a house of their own, at least not in the early days of their marriage, and many live for a number of years in extended family households, usually the husband’s. Even so, Nage generally hold in low regard people who reside in the houses of unrelated people or distant kin, describing them as “chickens without a coop” (No. 265). Before the introduction of wet rice cultivation, the Nage economy was based largely on swiddening, which involved regularly abandoning fields and opening new ones. Nevertheless, maintaining permanent villages (bo’a) with permanent houses, where major rituals were performed and graves were laid, was and remains fundamental to Nage identity. Accordingly, the village is the centre of social and traditional religious life, even though villagers’ fields are often located some considerable distance away, and it is in this context that Nage employ “crocodile of the lower regions” (No. 487) as a pejorative reference to people who rarely leave their fields, spend little time in their villages, and are rarely involved in and contribute little to community affairs. Revealing much the same concern are metaphors describing people who rarely leave their houses or appear in public (“civet inside a palm trunk” and “grub sniffing its own arse,” Nos. 202, 543) and expressions referring to people who insufficiently participate in group discussions (“dove looking at a pool of water,” No. 401; and “cockroach on the edge of a plate,” No. 532; see also “turtle that turns its head from side to side,” No. 490). How far the first two

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

347

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 348

metaphors imply lack of participation specifically in the life of a larger group is somewhat unclear. Nevertheless, all can be construed as advertising a more general failure to engage with others. As significant as their concern with “staying in place” – and maintaining relations with people equally associated with one’s place – is the value Nage put on what anthropologists call “generalized reciprocity,” an uncalculating give and take expected of members of the same social group. This finds expression in a series of metaphors, about ten in all, referring to indolence or shiftlessness, avoiding work, and relying on other people’s generosity. Instances include “Channel-billed cuckoo” (a bird parasitic on crows, No. 255), “coucal with a rotten anus” (No. 310), “snake in an orchard” (No. 422), “monitor lizard collecting ants” (No. 441), “tadpole feeding on dirt” (No. 484) and “praying mantis on top of a cotton blossom” (No. 498). At first glance, the number of such metaphors might suggest something like a tropical Protestant ethic. But, unlike some Westerners, Nage do not view industry as an end in itself; rather, they simply require people to work in order to support themselves and their families and to contribute to collective efforts – for example, by lending agricultural assistance to kin and neighbours and providing for group rituals. Also consistent with a value on reciprocity and mutual assistance are another dozen or more metaphors expressing disapproval of greed, including expressions that refer more specifically to insufficient reticence or excessive eagerness when food is offered (e.g., “horse that dances to the drum” No. 41; “bronzeback (snake) whose tail alone remains” No. 436), and several usages describing stinginess (“small wasp (and) fig sap,” No. 501), unwillingness to share (“buffalo that blocks the wallow,” No. 12), and ingratitude or, more specifically, treating badly someone whose generosity one enjoys (“stick horse, dog adept at climbing,” Nos. 49, 85; “Giant rat’s belly,” No. 179). Equally relevant are several metaphors expressing disapproval of people who too freely do what others tell them or give in to requests – thereby using up resources that should be expended on one’s family or meeting the demands of others (such as affines) to whom one is more definitely obligated (see “horse with a soft neck,” No. 47; “dog tame with everyone,” No. 98; “neck like a banana beetle,” No. 522) – as well as metaphors referring to wastefulness or profligacy (“cockatoos and crows,” No. 307) and unrewarded effort (Nos. 256 and 382, incorporating the Channel-billed cuckoo and the koel).

348

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 349

On the positive side, the value on reciprocity and helping others is further attested in metaphors referring approvingly to people who are generous or especially helpful (“horse that accepts a large rice container,” No. 39), willing to share (Nos. 318, 340, employing the drongo and friarbird), and considerate of their fellows (“frogs have livers, crayfish have bellies,” Nos. 481, 550). Possibly also belonging here is “mouse taking care of a Giant rat” (No. 183), though this can alternatively be counted as one more metaphor implying excessive or unnecessary generosity, specifically towards outsiders. Although conceivably connected with the foregoing, an otherwise separate series of metaphors, as many as fourteen, concerns performing tasks improperly. Some simply refer to doing something inefficiently or ineffectually, like “buffalo carrying vines on its head” (No. 4); “monkey carrying a gourd,” (No. 222); “monkey roasting a crayfish,” (No. 224); and “cockroach slamming into a spider’s web” (No. 533). Others express disapproval of people who work inconsistently – not seeing a task through to completion or stopping one thing and beginning another and thereby “mixing tasks.” An obvious example is our eponymous metaphor concerning the urinating dog (No. 93). Others include “rat with a broken placenta” (No. 188), “fly alighting on sores” (No. 516), and, in part, “rat without an escape hole” (No. 189) and “earthworm unable to re-enter the earth” (No. 561). This somewhat distinctive theme warrants further comment, since it suggests a quite specific cultural value. In various contexts, Nage require linked tasks that make up a project, such as building a house or laying a field, to be conducted in a regular sequence and carried through to completion before beginning another – thus quite contrary to the modern Western value on “multitasking” (a concept and practice that has recently received extensive attention in the psychological literature; see, e.g., Salvucci and Taatgen 2011).1 The same principle can be discerned in metaphors critically describing people who change their mind (“mouse turned into a Giant rat,” No. 184; “cockatoo’s wings,” No. 306) or who proceed in an irregular manner with quick changes of direction (“tiny bat,” No. 248; see also No. 332, “fantail does not want to agree,” denoting a fickle woman). And equally illustrative are metaphors expressing disapproval of speakers who jump from topic to topic, like “a monkey leaping from tree to tree” (No. 223), or suddenly change topics, like “a drongo’s broken tail” (No. 317). At the same time, this last pair of metaphors can be counted among a group of over twenty that focus on a more general theme of speaking improperly –

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

349

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 350

which is to say, in a disorderly, excessive, incoherent, untrustworthy, or harmful way. Instances include “butting of female goats” (No. 69), referring to thoughtless speech likely to have negative consequences; “goat on one hill, dog on another” (Nos. 75, 92), describing people who speak at cross-purposes; “dog that jumps on coconut dregs” (No. 95), referring to someone who misinterprets what is being said; “shrew” (No. 197), denoting a gossip; “tongue of a bronzeback snake” (No. 435), describing a smooth talker; “bees inside a nest” (No. 512) and “calling frogs” (No. 480), both referring to people who speak incoherently or noisily; and “dung beetle informs the earthquake” (No. 520), meaning a bearer of false news. In addition, several expressions employing the monkey and another incorporating the mysterious “you fowl” identify people who make false or hypocritical accusations (see Nos. 171, 176, 225, 283). While such metaphors might be expected to draw on vocal characteristics of the zoological vehicle, the majority, interestingly enough, are motivated instead by other physical qualities of the animals concerned. Other themes are more specific still but nonetheless suggest similarly general concerns. As many as ten metaphors describe bodily uncleanliness or personal untidiness. To refer to dirty or messy people, Nage thus speak of a “buffalo defecating as it moves” (No. 5), “sheep’s diarrhea” (No. 66), “cat’s face” (No. 152), “smelling like a shrew” (No. 199), “civet covering its droppings” (No. 201), “sheep’s placenta” (No. 67), and “chicken with feathered legs” (No. 264), the last two expressions referring to people who wear ill-fitting or excessive clothing. Three other metaphors of this sort have the monkey as their vehicle (see Nos. 212, 214, 215), thereby suggesting the monkey’s morphological resemblance to humans as part of the motivation. This concern with cleanliness may seem curious. Nage nowadays bathe regularly and otherwise keep clean, though what they say about the past implies that this was less true of people in former times, partly because of greater difficulty in gaining access to water. On the other hand, difficulty keeping clean and tidy does not mean that people will not aspire to do so, and in any case lack of cleanliness is always relative and often a question of perception. Employing goats, dogs, monkeys, rats, and insect larvae, another six metaphors describe people who are restive or who fidget (see Nos. 80, 94, 192, 238, 541, 545), a concern not implausibly connected with Nage disapproval of people who do not maintain a permanent residence and so display a more general spatial instability (see “scampering rat,” No. 192, which subsumes both meanings). All of the six can be applied to adults and so are partly dis-

350

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 351

tinguished from the larger series of usages, a dozen in all, which refers to annoying children who, by way of boisterous, rowdy, or otherwise bothersome behaviour, invoke the ire of adults. Like most people, Nage are generally fond of young children and, by Western standards at least, can even appear indulgent. On the other hand, because many adult activities, including relatively public events to which kin and neighbours are invited, take place inside houses – where of course people also care for children – youngsters and their demands often interfere with the conduct of these activities, as they can with adult attempts simply to get on with chores or rest and relax. Yet only rarely do Nage actively discipline children – with corporal punishment or removal, or even with direct reprimands. Instead, they voice criticism and complaints that often appear more to perform a cathartic function than to have a discernable effect on the behaviour of the children, and it is here that animal metaphors play a major part. While four usages expressing exasperation at children’s misbehaviour employ mammals – specifically goats, dogs, pigs, and monkeys (see Nos. 72, 80, 104, 127, 235) – the vehicles in most cases are biting insects or arachnids. It is an easy inference that it is both the physical discomfort they cause and the creatures’ small size that motivates their association with bothersome children. At the same time, all these metaphors may owe something to the connection revealed in other Nage usages (see chapter 1) between children and animals in general. In accordance with the far lower number of positive metaphors, positive themes do not form sizeable clusters to the extent that do negative expressions. Exceptions are the previously mentioned series referring to people who are helpful and considerate and the several metaphors alluding to social unity or solidarity. Another group comprises six metaphors, mostly employed when ritually addressing benevolent spirits, which express a desire for prolificity in humans and livestock, and whose vehicles include pigs, chickens, junglefowl, quails, fish fry, and ants (see Nos. 123, 270, 369, 396, 469, 510). A dozen or more metaphors describe people with exceptional skills or other admired qualities. But these are quite various and include expressions describing physical strength or exceptional energy (“veins of a friarbird,” No. 345), agility and manual skill (“hands and arms like a monkey,” No. 216; and “hands like a gecko,” No. 455), sturdiness and toughness (“flying fox’s elbow,” No. 244), a fine singing voice (“wailing civet,” No. 207), skill in speaking (“bronzeback’s tongue,” No. 435), and speed (“bronzeback,” No. 434). Others refer to personal good fortune (“friarbird,” No. 338) and qualities of persistence (two gecko

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

351

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 352

metaphors, Nos. 451, 457), boldness (Nos. 126, 553, incorporating the pig and a crayfish), dominance (Nos. 430, 440, employing two kinds of snakes), obedience (a horse metaphor, No. 44), and honesty (“straight like a civet’s tail,” No. 206). In contrast to their vehicles, which often describe animals behaving in quite specific ways, human referents of most Nage animal metaphors do not concern people engaged in specific tasks but are, instead, applicable to human activity in any number of contexts. An interesting exception is the annual pugilistic competitions called etu, to which I have necessarily referred in individual commentaries. Six metaphors (Nos. 17, 148, 306, 337, , 500, 551) relate to men engaged in etu. However, in only one, “cat from Geo” (No. 148), is this activity the exclusive context, whereas the others are more generally applied. “Dove droppings” (No. 408) might be counted as an additional instance, but this refers to an artefact rather than to a behaviour. Even so, the pugilistic referents were all mentioned by Nage commentators, and most if not all seem to have a special relevance for talking about these competitions. The Social Efficacy of Animal Metaphors Animal metaphors should not be expected to reflect every aspect of a society. Some will be reflected instead in different sorts of metaphors (plant metaphors, metaphors employing inanimate objects) while others may find no metaphorical expression at all. Still, Nage animal metaphors offer insight into a fairly wide range of values, principles, interests, and common concerns, and to that extent provide a fuller understanding of Nage society and culture – not to mention their knowledge of and relations with non-human animals (a matter discussed throughout Forth 2016). Quite another sort of question concerns the operation of animal metaphors in face-to-face relations and everyday social intercourse. Exemplified by metaphors appearing in proverbs, some usages serve a didactic or corrective purpose, and their content is typically positive or neutral, approvingly describing how things are or should be. The same is true of metaphors more simply referring to individuals displaying qualities that are generally admired, as when someone is described as especially helpful or skilled in some way. Of course, the majority of expressions incorporating animal metaphors, which have a decidedly negative import, can also serve a didactic function, although their main use is to voice disapproval of particular individuals. Obviously such criticism will have most

352

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 353

impact when uttered in direct address. But this is not to argue that Nage employ negative metaphors (or positive ones for that matter) in an entirely calculated way. For many are used in anger or when annoyed, and, as noted earlier, some appear to function cathartically for speakers rather than informatively or correctively for others. Nevertheless, it can be presumed that the use of animal metaphors serves to express and, in some measure, maintain and reinforce social values by advertising qualities that Nage consider good or (in the majority of instances) those they regard as bad. But this leaves the question of whether animal metaphors are more effective in this respect than are either other sorts of metaphors or literal language. This is a very large topic to which I cannot possibly expect to do full justice. However, taking cues from Nage usage, several observations can be registered. With negative metaphors, referring to someone as an animal or displaying attributes resembling an animal’s might seem all the more offensive insofar as this implies that the referent is not a human being or not fully human. On the other hand, since Nage (and one assumes other people as well) understand conventional metaphors figuratively, and thus as not really asserting that a person is an animal, then to that extent they could be received as a milder and, by virtue of their very conventionality, more acceptable way of expressing criticism – less severe than any literal, extemporary, and more pointed disapprobation. Nevertheless, the negative attribute is still contained in the metaphor’s interpretation, even though, in the Nage idiom, it is somewhat “covered up” or “disguised” (péle) by the animal vehicle. And to that extent the negative force of the metaphor is real enough. Otherwise expressed, the identification of a person with a non-human animal is preserved despite the recognized figurative character of the expression. Thus, whereas the “unreal” character of the metaphorical equation allows the expression – and the disapprobation to which it gives voice – not to be taken completely seriously or accepted in full measure, the interpretation of the metaphor (of which people should generally be aware) ensures its efficacy. This ambiguity of metaphor, and in the present case specifically animal metaphors, is further connected with another feature of such expressions – namely, their humorous character. This often became apparent when observing animal metaphors in use or when talking to people about particular expressions. Of course, not all animal metaphors are found amusing (positive metaphors usually are not) but many are, including a good number that refer

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

353

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 354

to human qualities deemed either mildly or seriously negative. Like puns and other rhetorical devices that identify different senses of a single word or phrase, metaphors, and perhaps especially metaphors linking animals and humans, confuse categorical distinctions and identify things that are normally separated, and it would appear to be mainly for this reason that they are commonly found to be humorous. However, humour evoked by animal metaphors can be seen not only as a function of their figurative character (itself the source of their ambiguity) but also as a factor augmenting recognition of their figurativeness and so similarly modifying their negative import. The combination may then make unfavourable evaluations that critical metaphors convey easier to take emotionally and more acceptable intellectually, even while the implicit criticism is understood and possibly accepted. If these remarks apply less to metaphors designating positive human qualities, the difference is obviously attributable to the fact that qualities of the animal, whether explicit in the expression or merely implicit, are ones people admire or to which they aspire. After all, not only Nage but people in general recognize that, in regard to many qualities (including their strength, speed, and endurance), animals are superior to humans, notwithstanding any general assessment of humans as, on the whole, superior to animals or as superior in other respects. As regards European perspectives, moreover, it is worth noting that, despite ubiquitous citations of Descartes as typifying a Western view of animals as unthinking and unfeeling automata – a rhetorical strategy especially favoured, it seems, by neo-animists and ontological pluralists – earlier and more recent philosophers from Montaigne to Midgley (2002) have taken quite the opposite position,2 as among natural scientists did Darwin (1872) in his ground-breaking demonstration of the continuity between humans and animals in regard to emotion and the expression of the emotions. From the manifestly positive value of certain qualities of animals, it therefore follows that a Nage man described, for example, as “a fine stallion” – meaning physically attractive and well turned out – will simply take this as a compliment. And owing to the typical specificity of animal metaphors, it further follows that he will not consider the characterization as implying that he has a face like a horse or eats like a horse (see “horse with its bridle removed,” No. 48). Of course, for the metaphor to work in the way intended, its conventional interpretation must be understood, and if it were not, then calling someone a horse, even a fine horse, could well be taken negatively.

354

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 355

Anthropomorphism, Animism, and Ontological Pluralism In a more general frame, how statements referring to someone as an animal are understood should depend on a particular view of relations between humans and animals. In a society in which non-human animals are considered fundamentally similar to humans, equal to humans, or even as types of humans, animal metaphors might function quite differently from what one finds among Westerners – and by all indications among Nage as well. But it does not follow that, in such a society, animal metaphors could never express disapproval or otherwise be used negatively. For if it is assumed that people the world over regard humans and the various animals with which they are familiar as belonging, at some level, to separate categories, then describing people as acting like any kind of animal, for example, would still entail their behaving like something they are not. In that case, one might imagine animal metaphors in our hypothetical society as a variety of “human metaphors,” usages describing people as occupying social categories to which they do not belong – as when a pampered girl is called a “princess” or someone not employed by a circus is derisively labelled a “clown.” But how one might detect any such ontological or epistemological difference in a society’s animal metaphors is quite another matter. Conventional animal metaphors are, before all else, standard statements regularly uttered in natural languages. Yet simply from the form of a statement it is not possible to discern the relation imagined by speakers between the animal vehicle and any human referent, or indeed whether an utterance is intended metaphorically at all. Thus the statement “Sadie is a dog” could be an uncomplimentary metaphorical reference to a human female or, alternatively, a literal statement of fact (referring, for example, to a small terrier once owned by my parents). What is more, a metaphor of exactly the same form can have different meanings in different speech communities. To cite one illustration, an Aboriginal Australian referring to a person as a “crow” (meaning a member of a certain social group) is saying something quite different from an Afrikaans or Dutch-speaker making the same statement (and meaning, in the first instance, that the person is “slender,” and in the second that he or she is “spirited and quick witted,” Dirven 1994, 74). Quite apart from the fact that the bird name in the three instances will refer to slightly different ornithological species, it might be objected that, in the first case,

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

355

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 356

the speaker is not using a conventional metaphor at all but either is not speaking metaphorically or is doing so only in the sense employed by Lévi-Strauss in his interpretation of totemism. Be that as it may, both in the Australian and European examples a human is verbally identified as an animal, and an animal of roughly the same sort, while in each case the statement conveys a different meaning and reflects a different motivation – and in the Australian case, presumably manifests a different view of relations between animals and humans in general. Where the metaphorical import of a statement can be established – from local commentary or from observing contexts of its use – animal metaphors applied to human beings are obvious instances of zoomorphism, speaking of people as animals or as like animals. Conventional metaphors of any sort are also invariably asymmetric, so that whereas Nage employ “urinating dog …” to describe people who prosecute a task inconsistently or without following through to the end, they never speak of dogs urinating as “inconsistent people.” In the same way, anglophones may characterize a despicable person as a “rat” but never describe a rat as a “despicable person.” On the other hand, they may conceive (although not usually speak) of rats as despicable animals. As this suggests, despite the asymmetry of conventional animal metaphors, zoomorphism implies its opposite, that is, anthropomorphism or, more specifically, an implicit personification (Kövecses 2010, 39) of animals – a view consistent with “interactionist” theories of metaphor most closely associated with Max Black (1962). Supporting this approach, one could then argue that calling a person a dog, for example, is possible only to the extent that dogs display traits and behaviours that are recognized as in some way similar to those that can be observed in humans. A review of the Nage corpus may suggest that different animal metaphors incorporate anthropomorphism in different ways or to varying degrees. An agile man described as having the “hands” of a Tokay gecko (No. 455) is someone whose hands and arms possess a degree of skill, especially in climbing and grasping, comparable to that found in the limbs of the lizard. Speaking of an inconsistent worker as a “dog pissing at the edge of a path” is different, insofar as the dog’s act of urination, something obviously natural to dogs, is not identified with the way (some) humans urinate but rather with a disapproved manner of discharging any variety of humans tasks, most and perhaps all of which a dog would be incapable of carrying out. Nevertheless, in both of these examples what is attributed to the animal vehicle – limbs in one case

356

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 357

corresponding to the limbs of the human referent, and in the other the capacity to urinate (though identified with quite different human behaviours) – is something that the animal palpably possesses or of which it is capable. In contrast, other metaphors apparently attribute to an animal qualities or actions that are normally ascribed only to humans (in part because most implicitly require linguistic ability). Thus, Nage speak of a monkey “scolding” a pig (No. 225) and “accusing” porcupines and Giant rats (Nos. 171, 176), a monkey “roasting” crayfish (No. 224), a mouse “mocking” a Giant rat (No. 182), a monitor lizard “tricking” ants, crustacean larvae doing the same to smaller fish fry (Nos. 442, 560), the friarbird “ordering, reserving” the sun (No. 350), and swallows “commanding” the months (No. 413). Similarly, another three metaphors (see Nos. 86, 430, 534) imply that the animals named possess “mind” (ngai zede) or “(force of) character, masterfulness” (waka), or “thoughts” and “feelings” (ate, literally “liver,” and tuka, literally “belly,” see No. 481). The fact is, however, that all of these actions, qualities, and properties are things that Nage do indeed ordinarily regard as exclusively human, so that none supports an interpretation of their animal metaphors implying a closer identity of humans and animals, as a general property of thought, any more than do, say, English animal metaphors. Not only do Nage understand metaphors depicting one animal “accusing” or “mocking” another animal as being as figurative as the animal names in relation to their non-animal referents, but comparable metaphors also occur in English. One thinks, for example, of “sedulous” apes, foxes being “charged with guarding” henhouses, “poor” church mice, “happy” clams, wolves “wearing” sheep’s “clothing,” dogs “lying (speaking falsely),” and “drunk” skunks.3 In addition, Nage metaphors describing animals as possessing human attributes of “mind” or “character” should be understood as referring more to qualities of their human referents than the animal vehicles – just as in English, describing someone as having the “manners of a pig” does not require any notion that pigs actually have manners. In fact, the point of this last expression is precisely that they do not. However interesting these comparisons may be, reviewing indications of anthropomorphism in individual metaphors only takes us so far in exploring how speaking of humans as animals may reflect cross-cultural differences in conceptions of relations between the two categories. Typically rejecting any concept of anthropomorphism, portrayed as a distinctively Western notion

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

357

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 358

that compromises a proper understanding of non-Western views of the world, a very different approach is suggested by several perspectives that have been brought together under the heading of the “ontological turn,” or what is more conveniently called “ontological pluralism.” Within this camp, a division is found between writers who characterize different societies as employing different “ontologies” (e.g., Descola 2013) – fundamentally different understandings of what sort of things exist in the world and how they are related – and others who propose a methodological (and quite explicitly political) use of ethnography to develop new concepts and new ways of interpreting and understanding human beings that would, in effect, replace what proponents view as a specifically Western (or “Cartesian”) philosophy that, when applied to non-Westerners, necessarily distorts its subject (Holbraad and Pedersen 2017, 14–17). Nevertheless, both approaches entail a view that non-Western societies, or some of these, conceive of a relation between humans and non-human animals that is radically different from what is found in Western thought. Indeed, hypothetical differences in ways people think about animals, specifically, have played a very large part in the “ontological turn,” as shown especially by the work of Descola (2013) and Viveiros de Castro (e.g., 1998, 2014). Although Descola has constructed a model of four different ontologies, the fundamental opposition in his theoretical scheme, as in the writings of other pluralists (e.g., Ingold), is between “naturalism,” characterized as a distinctly Western ontology, and “animism,” a deliberate redeployment of the term E.B. Tylor (1866, 1958) applied to any understanding of the world that attributes “life” and “souls” not just to all animate beings but to inanimate things as well. Where discernible in a more conventional anthropology, “naturalism” is criticized for depicting the ideas of others – and especially ideas inconsistent with or unsupported by modern science – as “representations,” specifically in the sense of mental processes whereby one thing (a category, image) “replaces” or “stands for” another, in the service of thought as well as for purposes of expression or communication. It is quite obvious how the usual treatment of metaphor, particularly by linguists, would fall within this latter frame. And it is for this reason that ontological pluralists, like Ingold (see chapter 2), Viveiros de Castro (see especially Viveiros de Castro 2004, 13–16), and Descola, reject “metaphor” (implicitly including conventional metaphor) and by the same token anthropomorphism as well – as an inadequate or inaccurate way of comprehending non-Western conceptions of

358

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 359

relations between humans and, among other things, animals. Accordingly, pluralists, and most notably Viveiros de Castro in his development of a theoretical model called “perspectivism,” speak of non-Westerners not as “representing” animals in a certain way but, instead, of their conceiving of no essential difference between animals and people, and furthermore, of nonhuman animals as “seeing” themselves as people and humans as animals (Viveiros de Castro 2014, 56–7). In the same vein, pluralists reject the standard anthropological contrast of “nature” and “culture” (or “nature” and “society”), specifically as this has been applied in “naturalist” interpretations of various ethnographically documented “beliefs” or “representations” – that is, ways of speaking – and practices from which these might be inferred, as “cultural” or “social” constructions of a pre-existing “natural” reality. Rather, in animist ontology, Viveiros de Castro claims, one finds not “multiculturalism” coexisting with a single nature but instead “multinaturalism” combined with a single culture shared by humans and non-humans alike. As previously indicated (in chapter 2; see also Forth 2016; Forth 2018b), Nage ethnography provides very little evidence for ontological animism or for either of the other two “non-naturalist” ontologies (“totemism” and “analogism”) identified by Descola. This much should be sufficiently indicated by earlier remarks on how Nage view animals as lacking culture, but it might also be noted that, whereas animists are described as attributing “souls,” personhood, and human-like perspectives on the world to non-human animals, Nage hold no such views, at least not as generally accepted or widely held propositions. A possible exception to this is the apparently “analogistic” identity Nage posit between humans and water buffalo owned by spirits. But, as shown in chapter 2, this idea is meaningful specifically in the context of sacrificial ritual and has no bearing on, and cognitively exists quite separately from, the various ways Nage speak of, and evidently think about, buffalo in the numerous buffalo metaphors reviewed in chapter 3. In fact, most relations Nage maintain in respect to animals, both conceptual and practical, point to an attitude of naturalism. Nevertheless, I would not want to classify Nage as fully fledged or exclusive “naturalists,” mainly because the four models Descola proposes appear not to identify separate “ontologies” but, instead, formal differences among ideas relating to animals and other non-human entities that can be found in any society – a possibility Descola himself partly concedes when he allows for ontological “slippage” (as when Europeans treat “their cat as though it had a soul,” Descola 2013, 233–4).

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

359

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 360

On these grounds alone, one should not expect Nage animal metaphors to reveal any unitary or pervasive ontology significantly different from any equally monolithic philosophy presumed to underlie animal metaphors employed by European-speakers. As already demonstrated, Nage regard their metaphors as figurative usages, a view consistent with their concept of metaphor as “covering speech.” By the same token, ethnographic conversations failed to reveal any notion that a person spoken of as an animal, or an animal displaying a specific behaviour, is a temporary or permanent transformation of that animal; is somehow possessed by the animal’s spirit (an entity in any case not recognized by Nage); or by his or her characteristics or actions reveals himself or herself as somehow “participating” (as Lévy-Bruhl might have had it) in the nature, character, or essence of the animal. As explained in chapter 2, Nage identifying themselves as “god’s chickens” entails no notion of a spiritual connection between chickens and people, and certainly not any belief that chickens too have souls in any way identical to the souls of humans. Something of this sort may be suggested by the Cuna of Panama (Howe 1977), who regard animals as once having been human, like people, but as having subsequently changed, so that Cuna metaphors describing people as being like animals can be seen to turn partly on this primordial ontological unity. But nothing comparable can be found either in Nage mythology or in what they say about animals at present. In addition, the Cuna believe that despite their primordial identity humans and animals “long ago … became fully differentiated” (45n8, 139); hence, as Howe makes clear, rhetorical statements linking animals and humans at present (which, he notes, are given a public interpretation by Cuna orators) must be understood, like comparable Nage usages, as conventional metaphors. If animists are supposed to see a continuity between animals and humans, a categorical unity applying to all animals at all times, then Nage animal metaphors reveal no more than specific and partial continuities between individual humans and particular animals displayed in observable similarities that, moreover, pertain most often not to permanent traits of character or appearance but to ways people present themselves to others temporarily and contextually. (Again, this contrast equally applies to Nage conventional metaphors and their proposition – which in some theoretical frameworks could be construed as “metaphor” in an extended sense – that humans simultaneously exist as spirit buffalo.) Of course, ontological pluralists do not deny that the people whose implicit or explicit ideas they adduce in support

360

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 361

of their theoretical schemes recognize that all animals manifestly differ from humans in their physical forms or habits. Rather, what they posit for nonWestern “animists” is an ontological attitude presupposing, specifically, a continuity of essence between humans and all non-humans or, in Viveiros de Castro’s formulation, something like a single culture. In a similar way, Descola describes animists as recognizing a resemblance of “interiority” (or nonmaterial essence) between humans and animals coexisting with a difference of “exteriority,” or manifest physical form. By contrast, naturalism presents the opposite configuration, combining a difference of interiority (only humans have “culture” or “souls”) with an exterior, or physical, resemblance (both humans and animals are composed of flesh and blood, and in a modern view humans are “naturally” a kind of animal).4 In view of these distinctions, Descola’s formulation, especially, facilitates a further assessment of the possible ontological implications of Nage animal metaphors, although one that hardly favours the pluralists. Conventional metaphor in Nage, or for that matter in any other language, appears to entail the inverse of animism: for, as an analysis of individual metaphors has revealed, these typically deal in exterior resemblances, selecting and foregrounding specific perceptible morphological and behavioural similarities between a given kind of animal and a specific human individual (or, less often, a collection of individuals). This formulation, it hardly needs remarking, straightforwardly corresponds to Descola’s model of “naturalism,” the diametric opposite of his “animism.” So if Nage had to be slotted into one ontological box or another, their animal metaphors would provide further grounds for characterizing this small-scale non-Western society of cultivators and hunters as “naturalists.” But to make this case within a scheme like Descola’s, one would further need to show that nothing like conventional metaphor exists among animists – or at least that, insofar as usages like describing a person as a urinating dog might be employed by people classified as animists, their animistic users understand these expressions very differently. Although not explicitly addressing the concept of conventional metaphor, Descola (2013, 251) actually appears to make such a case when he asserts: “in animist societies there are no examples in which the relations between human beings are specified by expressions that denote relations among nonhumans” (emphasis added). Evidently, this would include relations between animals (e.g., Nage “monkey roasting a crayfish”) or between animals and inanimate objects (“Pit viper waiting for the stick”). An exception he allows are “rare

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

361

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 362

cases in which the two types of relations coincide perfectly because of the similarity of the actions that they involve” (ibid., emphasis added), exemplified by usages in which terms that “evoke the behaviour of predatory animals” are employed for (human) warfare. Despite the disparity between “perfect coincidence” and “similarity” in this statement, what Descola seems to be arguing is that, where animists do speak of human actions with terms referring to animal actions (those “rare cases”), the actions are essentially the same or similar and, therefore, are to be understood not as metaphors but as literal propositions (as would obtain, for example, when anglophones describe both humans and animals as “eating,” “sleeping,” “urinating,” and so on). A similar approach is evident in other passages. Descola (2013, 250) interprets animists as conceiving of relations between “non- humans” and between humans and non-humans on the “model of human society,” and as “qualifying” (apparently meaning “describing”) these relations with “categories borrowed from the field of relations between humans” (emphasis added). Responding to Ingold’s criticism of this position (summarized in chapter 2), Descola then asserts that this animist conception “does not in any sense stem from metaphorical projection” – and that it does not do so specifically because such an understanding, either the animists’ or his own, would “lead back to a distinction of nature and society that is alien to local practices” (ibid.). Rather, he declares, in animist societies “social categories serve simply as handy labels to characterize a relationship, regardless of the ontological status of the terms that it links together” (250–1). If “label” here simply substitutes for “metaphor” (apparently sometimes subsuming the “ontological metaphors” of linguists, see Kövecses 2010), earlier in his book Descola (2013, 10) makes the same use of “model” – as when he speaks of a “common model” enabling the use of “named categories” that “represent some relations between humans on the model of symbiotic relations between other species” (emphasis added). Evidently, then, animists do sometimes engage in “representation,” though it should perhaps be recalled that Descola claims that this sort of representation is “rarer” than is using terms for human relations to describe “interactions between nonhumans.” The impression conveyed by this tendentious argument is that animists cannot employ animal metaphors by definition, and that in those “rare” cases where they appear to do so, these are not metaphors at all but merely convenient ways of speaking – whatever might be made of this distinction. Con-

362

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 363

versely, it seems, when “naturists” express views that suggest animist thinking, these can only be understood as “poetic licence” and “metaphor,” as when a Euro-American ecologist’s argument that “non-humans” possess an “awareness of a future” (Leopold 1987)5 is dismissed by Descola (2013, 196) as “nothing but a metaphor for the general teleonomy of nature.” By this point readers should be able to judge for themselves whether or not Nage metaphors describing animal behaviours (including animal actions involving other animals, human beings, or objects), and for the most part referring to humans, are simply to be understood as “handy labels.” As the size of the corpus attests, such expressions are anything but rare. As already shown, there is no evidence to support an understanding of Nage conventional animal metaphors as reflecting or composing an “animist” ontology. Taking a more positive view, it may be recalled how Nage animal metaphors prospectively equate any human being with animals of most kinds recognized by Nage, so that properties of animals are spoken of and presumably thought about as resembling those of humans. However, not only is this observation virtually tautological, but it surely applies to metaphors in English and other Western languages as much as it does to Nage. Especially if we can imagine conventional metaphors as, at some level, not being understood figuratively (“yes, I really do mean that John [a greedy or slovenly person, perhaps, or a policeman] is a pig”), then one could perhaps construe such expressions as instances of animism everywhere. But notwithstanding the fact that the new animism of the ontological pluralists concerns an identification of nonhuman animals as humans more than an identification of humans as animals (though this too is surely implied), the point of course applies to animal metaphors in all languages and so cannot be adduced in support of any distinctive, pervasive ontology maintained by some humans but not by others. Some Final Remarks As discussed in chapter 2, while generally treated under the heading of “symbolism” conventional metaphors, including ones that employ animals as vehicles, are cognitively different from other ways of speaking about and, implicitly, thinking about the world that have been described as “symbolic.” As the Nage evidence confirms, conventional metaphors are recognized by their users as figurative expressions, usages that are consciously symbolic,

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

363

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 364

and it is principally in this respect that they differ from ideas that have been called “beliefs,” “cultural representations,” or, indeed, “metaphors” in a nonconventional, extended sense. While dismissing “metaphor” as a Western, “naturalist” construction that distorts non-Western realities, ontological pluralists have unfortunately failed to distinguish clearly between these two current (though unequal) acceptations of “metaphor.” Yet in a transparent attempt to explain away evidence weighing against his model of “animism,” Descola, despite some rather obscurantist wording, inadvertently reveals the presence of conventional animal metaphors in what, according to his own criteria, would appear to be the most “animist” of non-Western societies. And by so doing, he provides further support for the universal occurrence of this way of speaking and thinking, especially about humans but, implicitly, about animals as well. But were Descola (2013, 250) to acknowledge the distinction between, on the one hand, conventional metaphor (or metaphor in the usual sense of the term) as an essentially figurative and consciously symbolic kind of representation, and, on the other hand, what in one place he calls “unconscious metaphor,” his theory of ontological differences among humans could be strengthened. Indeed, he seems almost to do so when he speaks of what are evidently conventional metaphors as nothing more than “handy labels” – which must mean a way of speaking – or categories that are “borrowed,” a phrasing that surely recalls the notion of transfer central to the European concept of metaphor. At the same time, this evaluation entails treating such usages as unimportant, playing no real part in the social lives of their users, and furthermore as irrelevant to matters of epistemology or ontology. The regular use of well over five hundred animal metaphors by the Nage – a small-scale eastern Indonesian society that, in most respects, does not differ from the Amerindian and Siberian societies on which the ontological pluralists place their greatest reliance – shows how mistaken this approach can be.

364

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 365

Notes

cha p ter on e 1 Ana Wa is also the name of a Nage clan, but this is understood not as “animal” but as “People of the Wind,” and the clan is alternatively known as Wa (“Wind”), or woe Wa (woe is “clan”). 2 Comparing Dutch and Afrikaans animal metaphors, Dirven (1994) argues that sometimes the “image” of a European animal (e.g., the fox) has been transferred to a morphologically and behaviourally similar African animal (e.g., the jackal). He also notes that while “crow” is a metaphorical vehicle in both languages, the name actually refers to different corvid species in the two cases and, partly for this reason, has different interpretations when applied to humans. 3 In Forth 2004a I mostly refer to the usages as “similes.” I would now judge this to be an unwarranted over-generalization. cha p ter t wo 1 See Ngadha péle, glossed in part as “to seal, cut off, barricade, dam up, separate (from)” and “to conceal, protect, shelter”; and pata péle, translated as “allusion, metaphor, simile, proverb” (Arndt 1961). For Lio, Arndt (1933) lists péle as “to speak in metaphors or similes” as well as péle pata, an obvious variant of Nage pata péle, as a term for “metaphor” or “simile.” Curiously, several Nage thought péle was a word borrowed from Indonesian, and indeed

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 366

péle, possibly deriving from Ambonese Malay, can be heard in the Indonesian spoken by Nage. However, the occurrence of the word in dictionaries of Lio and Ngadha, the first compiled in the 1920s, removes any doubt that the word is indigenous to these languages, or at the very least that it preceded the colonial period on Flores. 2 Only during my most recent trip to Flores (in October 2018) did I realize that, when speaking Indonesian, Nage will sometimes refer to a metaphorical meaning as arising when a statement describing an animal is “taken, brought, conveyed” (bawa), or “pulled” (tarik) to humans or (less often) is “linked” (kait) with humans. The usage certainly suggests an understanding of metaphor as involving a connection as well as a separation between source and target domains. However, it is not an idiom indigenous to the Nage language, nor can I find any definite indication of it in Indonesian dictionaries. 3 Also unlike Evans-Pritchard, Willis (1974, 14–15) speaks of Nuer relations with wild animals as “metaphorical,” specifically animals described by Evans-Prichard (1956) as Nuer totems. 4 Interestingly, the metaphorical identification of humans as “god’s chickens” may suggest a connection with Nage metaphors in which “chicken” refers, metonymically, to wife-takers (Nos. 268, 276). Particularly relevant here is the similarity between the Nage term for “wife-giver,” moi ga’e, literally “lord [and] master,” and ga’e déwa, the usual term for “god,” as well as several respects in which the power of wife-givers over wife-takers, the former being conceived as essential to the creation of children and therefore as sources of life, is comparable to the power Nage view god as exercising over humans in general. By all indications, however, the notion of humans as “god’s chickens” stands on its own and is not motivated by any aspect of the Nage system of asymmetric marriage alliance. Nor is it likely that the identification of wifetakers with chickens, or, more specifically, the requirement that they provide chickens to wife-givers, derives from a conception of humans in general as chickens of god. ch ap ter thre e 1 Here translated as “journey,” wesa is a dialectal equivalent of central Nage zala, “path.” In central Nage wesa means “door, doorway.”

366

N O T E S T O PA G E S 3 6 – 8 5

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 367

cha p ter f ive 1 The foregoing corrects Forth (2004a, 185), where the expression was given incorrectly as edho bédho; also, contrary to what may be suggested in this earlier reference, the phrase does not necessarily complement piko ta’a wito io (No. 393). In the first instance I apparently mistook edo for edho “to pull out, up,” whereas bédho is a simple mistranscription. 2 In Forth (2004a, 185) bebe was transcribed incorrectly as bhebhe. 3 For the sake of comparison with the Nage list, I include “bat” in the English list but exclude “cock,” “hen,” and “rooster” since these are all covered by Nage manu (chicken or domestic fowl). Some of Palmatier’s interpretations are suspect. For example, it is not clear that “booby” as a reference to a fool or insane person derives from the identically named seabird, nor that the bird called jay is the source of “jaywalk.” Coincidentally, however, “jay” can mean “an impertinent chatterer,” “a flashy or absurdly dressed person,” or “a stupid or silly person,” while “gannet,” the name of a seabird not unlike a booby, further refers to “a greedy person” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary) – two usages that Palmatier, whose focus is American English, does not record. 4 “Binomial” is sometimes employed only for “productive binomials” – terms in which a second name specifies a subclass of the category denoted by the first, as in Nage kolo dhoro (Barred dove), naming a kind of kolo (small dove). In contrast, I use “binomial” to refer to any name that comprises two analyzable lexemes, including “unproductive” names like ie wea (mynah) and koko wodo (scrubfowl). With just six exceptions, all binomials included in the seventy-two Nage bird categories are unproductive, and of these three are employed as metaphors and three are not. ch a p ter si x 1 While still harvested in other parts of Flores, the fry are no longer caught in central Nage owing to the construction several decades ago of a dam on the river Ae Sésa, the main water course in which the fry of marine-breeding fish occurred (Forth 2016, 213–14, 221–2). 2 One might also count mépu, but this is regarded as a large kind of hiku (pit viper; Forth 2016, 186–8), thus a folk-specific category, and is therefore implicitly encompassed by the one Nage metaphor that employs the pit viper.

N O T E S T O PA G E S 2 6 2 – 7 6

367

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 368

3 This corrects my previous statement that there were seven frog metaphors (Forth 2016, 221), though this did not include “tadpole.” cha p ter seven 1 A motif regularly carved on parts of Nage houses and buildings of ritual significance is sometimes referred to as a “butterfly.” This, however, is not the name of the motif, which, unlike some other carving motifs, is usually described as nameless. And no one knew its significance – other than as a motif that has always been used. 2 I am grateful to John Acorn, a zoologist at the University of Alberta, for advice regarding the identification of this insect and also for alerting me to the phenomenon of “nectar robbing” (see No. 502). ch ap ter ei g ht 1 Intuitively, this figure may seem low. It largely reflects the fact that two porcupine and three civet folk-specifics as well as three rat generics are not specifically employed as metaphors. 2 European examples of such metaphors include “dog in the manger” and “nourishing a viper in one’s bosom,” both derived from Aesop’s fables. 3 Distinguishing by life form, the figure for mammals is 18 (8 domestic and 10 wild), for birds 22, for other non-mammalian vertebrates 7, and for invertebrates 10. With the partial exception of mammals, which account for over 42 percent of all metaphors, these totals correspond reasonably closely to the proportion of usages employing members of different life forms. 4 In a few instances Nage metaphors refer expressly to people as spirits. Thus, a handsome man can be called a “male spirit” (hoga nitu) while a person who does something in a contrary manner can be described as “like a nitu spirit who inverts things with ease” (Forth 1998, 65). In the first example, however, the expression is an unequivocal compliment, and it hardly needs remarking how the same meaning could not possibly be conveyed by “snake,” “eel,” or any other animal identified with nitu spirits. As for the second, various forms of inversion are for Nage such a definitive attribute of nitu that no other entity could metaphorically serve as well. Also worth mentioning is “spirit firearm” (bedi nitu), another spirit metaphor employed as the sole proper name of an insect, the Bombardier beetle. Nage similarly describe, but do not name,

368

N O T E S T O PA G E S 2 7 8 – 3 3 2

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 369

monitor lizards as “spirit coconut graters,” with reference to the shape of the lizard’s head; a kind of eel as a “spirit weaving sword”; and referring to its speed, the bronzeback snake (No. 434) as a “spirit blowgun.” But while all these usages can be understood as metaphors – in fact Nage describe them as no more than “ways of speaking” (Forth 2016, 244) – they are obviously not animal metaphors. cha p ter n i ne 1 For another eastern Indonesian example of this principle, see Onvlee (1983) on house construction on Sumba. 2 Another seventeenth-century philosopher, Ralph Cudworth, also advanced a radically contrary position, arguing not only that animals have thoughts and feelings but that, like humans, they also have souls (Harrison 1998; see also Passmore 1951, 24–5, 28). Interestingly, the Nage concept of mae (“soul”), corresponding in many respects to the Christian concept, is not something Nage ordinarily attribute to animals. 3 All these examples, and others that could be cited, are drawn from Palmatier (1993). The same point could of course be made with reference to non-animal metaphors, for example “the pot calling the kettle black.” 4 Descola argues that naturalism has deep roots in Western history. This is not the place to consider how far the modern or “scientific” view of humans and animals is in fact continuous with pre-scientific, Christian views, but I would just mention 1 Corinthians 15:39, where it is stated that “All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.” Surely this suggests that humans and animals do not possess the same “exteriority.” What is more, opinion on whether or not animals have souls appears to have varied considerably over the ages, both among churchmen and philosophers. 5 Descola erroneously cites the original publication date as 1947 and, in his bibliography, lists a 1985 edition. The correct dates are the ones I give here. Leopold’s book was most recently republished in 2013.

N O T E S T O PA G E S 3 4 9 – 6 3

369

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 371

References

Ammer, C. 1989. It’s Raining Cats and Dogs … and Other Beastly Expressions. New York: Dell Publishing. Arndt, Paul. 1933. Li’onesisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch. Ende-Flores: ArnoldusDruckerei. – 1961. Wörterbuch der Ngadhasprache. Studia Instituti Anthropos, 15. Posieux, Fribourg, Suisse: Anthropos-Institut. Bader, H. 1971. “Der Regenbogen in der Auffassung der Florinesen.” Anthropos 66: 947–77. Barnes, R.H. 1973. “The Rainbow in the Representations of Inhabitants of the Flores Area of Indonesia.” Anthropos 68: 611–13. Berlin, Brent. 1992. Ethnobiological Classification: Principles of Categorization of Plants and Animals in Traditional Societies. Princeton, nj: Princeton University Press. Bird-David, Nurit. 1999. “‘Animism’ Revisited: Personhood, Environment, and Relational Epistemology.” Current Anthropology 40, Supplement: S67–S79. Black, Max. 1962. Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca, ny: Cornell University Press. Blust, Robert, and Stephen Trussel. 2010–ongoing. The Comparative Austronesian Dictionary. www.trussel2.com/ACD. Boyer, P. 1994. The Naturalness of Religious Ideas: A Cognitive Theory of Religion. Berkeley: University of California Press. Coates, Brian J., and K. David Bishop. 1997. A Guide to the Birds of Wallacea: Sulawesi, the Moluccas and Lesser Sunda Islands. Alderley, au: Dove Publications.

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 372

Cochetti, Stefano. 1995. “The Dogon Sacrifice as a Literal Metaphor.” Paragrana 4 (2): 144–50. Crocker, J. Christopher. 1977a. “My Brother the Parrot.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 164–92. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. – 1977b. “The Social Functions of Rhetorical Forms.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 33–66. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. D’Andrade, Roy G. 1995. The Development of Cognitive Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Darwin, Charles. 1872. The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. London: John Murray. Descola, Philipe. 2013 [2005]. Beyond Nature and Culture. Translated from the French by Janet Lloyd. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Dirven, René. 1994. Metaphor and Nation: Metaphors Afrikaners Live By. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Echols, John M. and Hassan Shadily. 1989. An Indonesian-English Dictionary. 3rd ed. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Eco, Umberto. 2003. Mouse or Rat? Translation as Negotiation. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Evans-Pritchard, E.E. 1940. The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Oxford: Clarendon Press. – 1956. Nuer Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fernandez, James W. 1986. Persuasions and Performances: The Play of Tropes in Culture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Forth, Gregory. 1981. Rindi: An Ethnographic Study of a Traditional Domain in Eastern Sumba. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. – 1988. “Apes and Dugongs: Common Mythological Themes in Diverse Southeast Asian Communities.” Contributions to Southeast Asian Ethnography 7: 189–229. – 1989. “Animals, Witches and Wind: Eastern Indonesian Variations on the ‘Thunder Complex.’” Anthropos 84: 89–106. – 1991. “Nage Directions: An Eastern Indonesian System of Spatial Orientation.” In Social Space, ed. O. Grøn, E. Engelstad, and I. Lindblom, 138–48. Odense: Odense University Press. – 1992. “The Pigeon and the Friarbird: The Mythical Origin of Death and Daylight in Eastern Indonesia.” Anthropos 87: 423–41. – 1993 “Social and Symbolic Aspects of the Witch among the Nage of Eastern Indone-

372

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 373

sia.” In Understanding Witchcraft and Sorcery in Southeast Asia, ed. C.W. Watson and R.F. Ellen, 99–122. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. – 1994 “‘Post’ Modernism: Issues of Meaning, Cultural Objectification and NationalLocal Distinctions in an Eastern Indonesian Community.” In Official Rhetoric, Popular Response: Dialogue and Resistance in Indonesia and the Philippines, ed. J. Nourse and G. Acciaioli, 144–56. Special issue of Social Analysis 35. – 1998. Beneath the Volcano: Religion, Cosmology and Spirit Classification among the Nage of Eastern Indonesia. Leiden: kitlv Press – 2000. “Eastern Sumbanese Bird Classification.” Journal of Ethnobiology 20 (2): 161–92. – 2004a. Nage Birds: Classification and Symbolism among an Eastern Indonesian People. London: Routledge. – 2004b. “Public Affairs: Institutionalized Non-Marital Sex in an Eastern Indonesian Society.” Bijdragen tot de Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde 160 (2/3): 315–38. – 2004c. “A ‘Cock’ and ‘Bull’ Story: Nage Sex Terms and Their Implications for Ethnozoological Classification.” Anthropological Linguistics 46 (4): 427–49. – 2005. “The Diatribe of ‘Ajo Bupu and the Oration of Lowa Bata: Examples of Parallelistic Speaking among the Nage of Central Flores (Indonesia).” Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 6 (1): 35–56. – 2006. “Words for ‘Bird’ in Eastern Indonesia.” Journal of Ethnobiology 26 (2): 177–207. – 2007a. “Can Animals Break Taboos? Applications of ‘Taboo’ among the Nage of Eastern Indonesia.” Oceania 77 (2): 215–31. – 2007b. “Pigeon and Friarbird Revisited: A Further Analysis of an Eastern Indonesian Mythico-Ornithological Contrast.” Anthropos 102: 495–513. – 2007c. “Transformation and Replacement: A Comparison of Some Indonesian Bird Myths.” In Pika-Pika: The Flashing Firefly: Essays to Honour the Life of Pauline Hetland Walker (1938–2005), ed. Anthony R. Walker, 359–77. Delhi: Hindustan Publishing Corporation. – 2008. Images of the Wildman in Southeast Asia: An Anthropological Perspective. London: Routledge (paperback edition 2012). – 2009a. “Tree Totems and the Tamarind People: Implications of Clan Plant Taboos in Central Flores.” Oceania 79: 263–79. – 2009b. “Symbolic Birds and Ironic Bats: Varieties of Classification in Nage Folk Ornithology.” Ethnology 48 (2): 139–59. – 2009c. “Separating the Dead: The Ritual Transformation of Affinal Exchange in Central Flores.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.) 15: 557–74.

REFERENCES

373

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 374

– 2011. “Charcoal, Eggplants, and Small Hairy Hominoids: Dietary and Behavioural Components of a ‘Wildman’ Image from West Central Flores (Indonesia).” Anthropos 106: 57–68. – 2012a. “Marking-Reversals and Their Relevance for Prehistory: An Eastern Indonesian Case.” Oceanic Linguistics 51 (2): 456–69. – 2012b. “Of Mice and Rats: The Place of Murids in Nage Animal Classification and Symbolism.” Journal of Ethnobiology 32 (1): 50–72. – 2013. “Symbolic Lizards: An Exploration of Forms of Special Purpose Classification of Animals among the Nage of Eastern Indonesia.” Anthrozoös 26 (3): 357–72. – 2015. “Lumpers, Splitters, and Other Variations in Nage Animal Classification.” Journal of Ethnobiology 35 (2): 386–407. – 2016. Why the Porcupine Is Not a Bird: Explorations in the Folk Zoology of an Eastern Indonesian People. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. – 2017a. “What a Little Bird Tells Us about Symbolic Thought: The Russett-Capped Stubtail (Tesia everetti) in Nage Augury, Myth, and Metaphor.” Journal of Ethnobiology 37 (4): 689–99. – 2017b. “Cryptids, Classification, and Categories of Cats: An Ethnozoological Study of Unidentified Felids from Eastern Indonesia.” In Anthropology and Cryptozoology, ed. Samantha Hurn, 32–53. London: Routledge. – 2017c. “Ethnographic Reports of Freshwater Turtles on Flores Island: The Possibilities of an Undocumented Chelonian Species.” Herpetological Review 48 (2): 304–10. – 2018a. “Elderly People Growing Tails: The Constitution of a Non-Empirical Idea.” Current Anthropology 15 (4): 397–414. – 2018b. “‘Living’ in Nage, or the Meaning of ‘Life’ in an Eastern Indonesian Society.” Oceania 88 (2): 168–82. – 2018c. “Sex Differentiable Terms in Languages of Flores Island: A Comparative Review.” Oceanic Linguistics 57 (1): 101–22. – 2018d. “Further Evidence for Undocumented Freshwater Turtles on Flores Island, Indonesia.” Herpetological Review 49 (1): 19–21. Forth, Gregory, and Svitlana Kukharenko. 2012. “Animals Crossing: Analytical Observations on a Cross-Culturally Ubiquitous Mortuary Belief.” Folkore 123 (2): 152–78. Fox, James J. 1971. “Sister’s Child as Plant: Metaphors in an Idiom of Consanguinity.” In Rethinking Kinship and Marriage, ed. Rodney Needham, 219–52. London: Tavistock. Franklyn, Julian. 1975. A Dictionary of Rhyming Slang. 2nd ed. [first 1960]. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

374

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 375

Geertz, Clifford. 1972. “Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight.” In The Interpretation of Cultures, 412–53. New York: Basic Books (Originally published in Daedalus 101 [1972]: 1–37). Glucksberg, Sam, and Boaz Keysar. 1993. “How Metaphors Work.” In Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed., ed. Andrew Ortony, 401–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Goatly, Andrew. 2006. “Humans, Animals, and Metaphors.” Society and Animals 14 (1): 15–37. Gudeman, Stephen. 1986. Economics as Culture: Models and Metaphors of Livelihood. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Hammersley, Martyn, and Paul Atkinson. 2007. Ethnography: Principles in Practice. 3rd ed. London: Routledge. Harrison, Peter. 1998. “The Virtues of Animals in Seventeenth-Century Thought.” Journal of the History of Ideas 59 (3): 463–84. Harvey, Graham. 2006. Animism: Respecting the Living World. New York: Columbia University Press. Holbraad, Martin and Morten Axel Pederson. 2017. The Ontological Turn: An Anthropological Exposition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Howe, James. 1977. “Carrying the Village: Cuna Political Metaphors.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 132–63. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Hunn, Eugene S. 1999. “Size as Limiting the Recognition of Biodiversity in Folkbiological Classifications: One of Four Factors Governing the Cultural Recognition of Biological Taxa.” In Folkbiology, ed. Douglas L. Medin and Scott Atran, 47–69. Cambridge, ma: mit Press. – 2011. “Ethnozoology.” In Ethnobiology, ed. Eugene N. Anderson, Deborah Pearsall, and Eugene S. Hunn, 83–95. Hoboken, nj: Wiley Blackwell. Hurn, Samantha. 2012. Humans and Other Animals: Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Human-Animal Interactions. London: Pluto Press. Hutchinson, Sharon E. 1996. Nuer Dilemmas: Coping with Money, War, and the State. Berkeley: University of California Press. Ingold, Tim. 2011. The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. London: Routledge. – 2016. “End Comment: To Conclude in the Spirit of Rebirth, or a Note on Animic Anthropo-ontogenesis.” In Animism in Southeast Asia, ed. K. Århem and G. Sprenger, 302–9. London: Routledge. Irwin, Rebecca E., Judith L. Bronstein, Jessamyn S. Manson, and Leif Richardson.

REFERENCES

375

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 376

2010. “Nectar Robbing: Ecological and Evolutionary Perspectives.” Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 41: 271–92. Jackson, Michael. 1996. “Introduction: Phenomenology, Radical Empiricism, and Anthropological Critique.” In Things as They Are: New Directions in Phenomenological Anthropology, ed. M. Jackson, 1–50. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Jakobson, R., and M. Halle. 1956. Fundamentals of Language. The Hague: Mouton. Jones, Ernest. 1948. Papers on Psycho-analysis. 5th ed. London: Bailliere, Tindall and Cox. Keesing, Roger. 1985. “Conventional Metaphors and Anthropological Metaphysics: The Problematic of Cultural Translation.” Journal of Anthropological Research 41: 201–17. Kövecses, Zoltán. 2010. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Larson, Helen, K. 2011. “Systematics of the Rhyacichthyidae.” In The Biology of Gobies, ed. R.A. Patzner, James L. Van Tassell, Marcelo Kovacic, and B.G. Kapoor, 51–60. New York: crc Press, New York. Lawrence, Elizabeth. 1993. “The Sacred Bee, the Filthy Pig, and the Bat out of Hell: Animal Symbolism as Cognitive Biophilia.” Biophilia Hypothesis, ed. Stephen R. Kellert and Edward O. Wilson, 301–41. Washington, dc: The Island Press. Leach, E.R. 1976. Culture and Communication: The Logic by Which Symbols Are Connected. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leopold, Aldo. 1987 [1949]. A Sand County Almanach: And Sketches Here and There. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1963. Totemism. Boston: Beacon Press. Levin, Samuel R. 1993. “Language, Concepts, and Worlds: Three Domains of Metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought, ed. Andrew Ortony, 112–23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Liebow, Elliot. 1967. Tally’s Corner: A Study of Negro Streetcorner Men. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company. Mathijsen, A. 1906. Tettum-Hollandsce woordenlijst, met beknopte spraakkunst. Verhandelingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen. Vol. 56 (2).

376

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 377

Midgley, Mary. 2002 Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature. London: Routledge. Miller, George A. 1993. “Images and Models, Similes and Metaphors.” In Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed. Ed. Andrew Ortony, 357–400. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Morgan, Jerry L. 1993. “Observations on the Pragmatics of Metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed., ed. Andrew Ortony, 124–34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Needham, Rodney. 1972. Belief, Language, and Experience. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Ohnuki-Tierney, Emiko. 1987. The Monkey as Mirror: Symbolic Transformations in Japanese History and Ritual. Princeton, nj: Princeton University Press. Olatéju, Adésola. 2005. “The Yorùbá Animal Metaphors: Analysis and Interpretation.” Nordic Journal of African Studies 14 (3): 368–83. Onvlee, Louis. 1983. “The Construction of the Dam in Mangili: Notes on the Social Organization of Eastern Sumba.” In Structural Anthropology in the Netherlands, ed. P.E. de Josselin de Jong, 150–63. Dordrecht, nl: Springer. – 1984. Kamberaas (Oost-Soembaas)-Nederlands woordenbook. Dordrecht, nl: Foris Publications. Ortony, Andrew. 1993. “The Role of Similarity in Similes and Metaphors.” In Metaphor and Thought, ed. Andrew Ortony, 342–56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Palmatier, R. 1995. Speaking of Animals: A Dictionary of Animal Metaphors. Westport, ct: Greenwood Press. Pareira, M. Mandalangi, and E. Douglas Lewis. 1998. Kamus Sara Sikka Bahasa Indonesia. Ende, Flores: Penerbit Nusa Indah. – n.d. Kamus Bahasa Indonesia-Sara Sikka An Indonesian – Sikkanese Dictionary oleh Edmundus Pareira and E. D. Lewis. Privately published. Passmore, J.A. 1951. Ralph Cudworth: An Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Peirce, C.S. 1930–35. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Ed. C. Harteshorne and P. Weiss. Cambridge, ma: Harvard University Press. Radcliffe-Brown, A.R. 1951. “The Comparative Method in Social Anthropology.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 81: 15–22. Richards, I.A. 1936. The Philosophy of Rhetoric. London: Oxford University Press. Rosaldo, Michelle Z. 1980. Knowledge and Passion: Ilongot Notions of Self and Social Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Salvucci, D.D., and N.A. Taatgen. 2011. The Multitasking Mind. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

REFERENCES

377

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 378

Sandor, Andras. 1986. “Metaphor and Belief.” Journal of Anthropological Research 42 (2): 101–22. Sapir, J.D. 1977. “The Anatomy of Metaphor.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 3–32. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Simpson, K., and N. Day. 1993. Field Guide to the Birds of Australia. 4th ed. Ringwood, au: Viking O’Neil, Penguin Books Australia Ltd. Sommer, Robert, and Barbara A. Sommer. 2011. “Zoomorphy: Animals Metaphors for Human Personality.” Anthrozoös 24 (3): 237–48. Sperber, Dan. 1975. Rethinking Symbolism. Translated from the French by Alice L. Morton. Cambridge, uk: Cambridge University Press. Tambiah, S.J. 1969. “Animals are Good to Think and Good to Prohibit.” Ethnology 8 (4): 423–59. Tule, Philipus. 1998. Keonese-Indonesian-English Dictionary. Privately published. Turner, Terence. 1991. “‘We Are Parrots,’ ‘Twins Are Birds’: Play of Tropes as Operational Structure.” In Beyond Metaphor: The Theory of Tropes in Anthropology, ed. James W. Fernandez, 121–58. Stanford, ca: Stanford University Press. Turner, Victor. 1967. The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual. Ithaca, ny: Cornell University of Press. Tylor, E.B. 1866. “The Religion of Savages.” Fortnightly Review 6: 71–86. – 1958 [1871]. Primitive Culture, Vol. 2. New York: Harper and Row. Urban, Greg. 1996. Metaphysical Community: The Interplay of the Senses and the Intellect. Austin: University of Texas Press. Urton, Gary, ed. 1985. Animal Myths and Metaphors in South America. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Valeri, Valerio. 2000. The Forest of Taboos: Morality, Hunting, and Identity among the Huaulu of the Moluccas. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Van den Bergh, G.D., H.J.M. Meijer, Rokus Awe Due, M.J. Morwood, K. Szabo, L.W. van den Hoek Ostende, T. Sutikna, E.W. Saptomo, P.J. Piper, and K.M. Dobney. 2009. “The Liang Bua Faunal Remains: A 9.5. k.yr. Sequence from Flores, East Indonesia.” Journal of Human Evolution 57: 527–37. Van Suchtelen, B.C.C.M.M. 1919–21. Endeh (Flores). Mededeelingen van het Bureau voor de Bestuurszaken der Buitengewesten, bewerkt door het Encylopaedisch Bureau, Aflevering 26. Weltevreden: Papyrus. Verheijen, Jilis A.J. 1990. Dictionary of Plant Names in the Lesser Sunda Islands. Pacific Linguistics Series D, 83. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies.

378

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 379

Viveiros de Castro. E. 1998. “Cosmological Deixis and Amerindian Perspectivism.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.) 4: 469–88. – 2004. “Perspectival Anthropology and the Method of Controlled Equivocation.” Tipiti 2 (1): 3–22. – 2014 [2009]. Cannibal Metaphysics: For a Post-Structural Anthropology. Translated from the French by Peter Skafish. Minneapolis: Univocal. Wagner, Roy. 1986. Symbols That Stand for Themselves. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. West, Harry G. 2007. Ethnographic Sorcery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Willis, Roy. 1974. Man and Beast. New York: Basic Books. Wurm, S.A., and Shiro Hattori, eds. 1981. Language Atlas of the Pacific Area. Canberra: Australian Academy of the Humanities in collaboration with the Japan Academy.

REFERENCES

379

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 381

Index

Acorn, John, 368n2 Aesop’s fables, 60, 131, 368n2 (ch. 8) affinal alliance, asymmetric marriage alliance, 4, 110, 173, 176, 345, 346, 366n4. See also bridewealth; marriage; wifegivers and wife-takers Afrikaans, 355, 365n2 Ammer, C., 85, 141, 181–2 analogy, 16, 19, 20, 39, 40, 43–4, 45, 49, 111, 134, 176, 246; external and internal, 20, 43–4 ancestors, 59, 169–70, 292 animal, animals: Nage term for “animal,” 8, 365n1 (ch. 1); Nage concept of, 8, 53, 331, 332, 333–5; prominence in metaphors, 3, 27, 313; size of animals affecting metaphorical prominence, 160, 304, 309, 313, 315, 351 animism, 12, 28–9, 46, 51–22, 271, 354, 355, 358–63, 364 anthropomorphism, 356–7, 358 ants, 42, 172, 220, 254–5, 266, 280, 283, 285–8, 300, 309, 319, 351 arachnids. See invertebrates; scorpions; spiders Arenga palm, 75, 106, 122, 143, 234–5, 319. See also toddy Aristotle, 18 Arndt, P., 89, 133, 296, 365n1 (ch. 2) augury, 3, 161, 169, 183, 205. See also omens

Bahasa Indonesia. See Indonesian national language Bali, Balinese, 41, 42, 17; Balinese cows, cattle, 78–9, 80 bats, 143, 162–5, 282, 311, 313, 315, 316, 317 bedbugs, 291, 298–9, 310, 319 bees, 39, 280, 284, 288–9, 291, 350 beetles, 10, 74, 281, 291–4, 300, 309, 317, 318, 320, 321, 348, 350, 368n4 belief: contrasting to metaphor, 28, 40, 41, 48, 49–52, 54, 55, 67, 143, 162, 190, 213, 229, 257, 291, 320–4, 330, 331–2 Berlin, B., 327 betel and areca (nut), 58, 181, 197, 218–19 binary composites, 11, 53, 58, 87, 91–2, 97, 122, 127, 145, 170, 226–7, 230, 231, 285, 298, 302, 328–9 birds, 20, 40, 43, 46, 126, 148, 279, 284, 309, 310–11, 323, 368n3 (ch. 8), 369n4; bird metaphors, 53, 120, 161–242, 287, 310, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 320, 321, 324, 326, 329, 337, 341–2; category of “bird,” 162; witch birds, 192, 194, 221, 225, 324 birds of prey, 190, 194, 210, 216, 219, 221, 225, 316, 323. See also eagles; owls Bororo, 6, 40, 41, 42–6, 343 Boyer, P., 18–19 bridewealth, 4, 32, 48, 54, 58–9, 62, 63, 68, 77, 78, 80, 83, 85, 92, 103, 169, 174, 178, 181, 185, 287, 320, 324, 325, 328, 347

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 382

buffalo (water buffalo), 4, 16, 19–20, 26, 54–67, 68, 69, 78, 82, 84, 85, 90, 91, 94, 96, 111, 117, 130, 146, 159–60, 163, 164, 184, 185, 186, 232, 287, 314, 315, 318, 326, 328, 331, 339, 340, 342, 346, 348, 349, 350, 359; human identification with, 45–8, 49, 50, 55, 220, 323–4, 332, 359, 360 bugs: true bugs, 294–5. See also invertebrates bushchat (bird), 161, 165–6, 241, 329 bushlark (bird), 166 butterflies, 279, 324, 368n1 (ch. 7) carving, 261, 275, 368n1 (ch. 7) Catholicism. See Christianity cats, 11, 53, 91, 92, 97, 112, 113–21, 143, 145, 146, 148, 160, 177, 313, 315, 318, 337, 339– 41, 342, 344, 346, 347, 350, 352, 359; ngo ngoe (kind of wild cat), 54, 114, 119, 279, 310, 327, 334 cattle, 54, 55, 78–9, 80, 81, 96, 160, 315, 340; among the Nuer, 40–1, 42, 64 centipedes, 298, 306, 308 Chestnut-backed thrush, 242 chickens, 15–16, 40, 64, 65, 105, 117, 159, 169–86, 187, 195, 205, 214, 218, 221, 225, 229, 240, 293, 310, 312, 314, 315, 319, 323, 326, 337, 344, 347, 350, 351, 369n3; god’s chickens (chickens of god), human beings as, 18, 43–4, 45, 46–7, 49, 51, 172, 342, 360, 366n4 children: metaphors referring to, 8, 81, 85, 90, 94, 98, 104, 105, 114, 138, 146, 152, 157, 166, 205, 236, 245, 263, 264, 280, 282, 291, 294, 295, 298, 302, 316–17, 342, 351, 366n4 Christianity, 4, 50, 77, 172, 201, 225–6, 270, 369n2, 369n4 chronological signs: metaphors referring to, 101, 167, 168, 202, 206–7, 222, 239, 316, 320, 324, 325, 326 circle-dancing, 31, 92, 106, 130, 187, 217, 259–60, 266, 308 civet (Palm civet), xii, 81, 92, 114, 116, 142– 7, 160, 312, 315, 317, 318, 319, 321, 329, 337, 340, 347, 350, 351, 352, 368n1 (ch. 8) cockatoos, 147, 167, 169, 186–9, 190, 192, 209, 221, 241, 275, 329, 338, 348, 349

382

cock-fighting, 173; in Bali, 41, 42, 47 cockroaches, 247, 295–7, 319, 347, 349 cognitivism: cognitive aspects of metaphor and symbolism, 18–19, 47, 49–51, 321, 331, 335, 359, 363 composite terms, expressions. See binary composites conventional metaphor. See metaphor crabs. See crustaceans crickets. See grasshoppers Crocker, J.C., 40, 41, 42, 43–4 crocodiles, 12, 243, 244, 272–5, 313, 319, 341, 345, 347 crow, 167, 187, 188–9, 190–1, 209, 222, 225, 316, 324, 348, 355, 365n2; Flores crow, 190, 324 crustaceans, 111, 150, 152, 265, 302–6, 309, 316, 322, 357 cuckoos, 174, 190, 236; channel-billed cuckoo, 167–8, 187, 222, 241, 315, 316, 348; koel, 167, 168–9, 187, 222, 241, 315, 316, 348 cuckoo-shrike, 191, 210, 323 Cudworth, R., 369n2 Cuna, 35, 360; concept of metaphor, 35 Darwin, C., 50, 354 Deane, Shelbra, 45 deer, 69, 79, 83, 89, 92, 100, 108, 113, 122–6, 160, 234, 263, 312, 313, 315, 316, 326, 328, 340, 341 Descartes, R., 354, 358 Descola, P., 28, 46, 52, 358, 359, 361–3, 364, 369nn4–5 Dhawe (region), 266 Dirven, R., 13, 365n2 dogs, xi, xii, 9, 11, 14, 19–20, 33, 38–9, 40, 45, 53, 58–9, 65, 74–5, 83, 84, 86–7, 91–103, 105, 108, 112, 114, 116, 119, 127, 130, 144, 146, 148, 154–5, 158, 159, 160, 272, 297, 326, 328, 331, 339, 340, 342, 344, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 350, 351, 355, 356, 357, 361; dog in the manger (English metaphor), 48, 60, 368n2 (ch. 8); Nage dogs, men as, 18, 45, 47, 100, 342, 345; sky dog, 10, 239 dollarbird, 192, 241, 344 dolphins, 10, 38, 263, 273, 278, 316, 346

INDEX

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 383

domestic fowls, 12, 44, 201, 209, 321. See also chickens domestic/wild contrast, 26–7, 48, 53, 85, 96, 103, 110, 113–14, 159–60, 312–13, 314– 15, 325, 326, 327, 340, 368n3 (ch. 8) doves. See pigeons and doves drongo (bird), 192–3, 202, 204, 225, 316, 324, 349 dugong, 264 Dutch, 260; language, 4, 30, 34, 355, 365n2 eagles, 194–5, 210, 225, 241, 313, 314. See also birds of prey earthquake, 291–2, 321, 350 earthworms, 306–7, 319, 322, 349 Ebu Lobo volcano, 68, 86, 88, 149, 240, 273, 300 economy, economic activities, 4, 347–9. See also hunting; rice cultivation eels, 214, 265, 267–8, 302, 322, 323, 331, 368– 9n4 Endenese, 25, 120, 248, 308 English: English animal metaphors, xi–xii, xiii, 3, 7–8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 23, 45, 48, 50, 57, 60, 61, 63, 68, 72, 74, 80, 81, 85, 86, 88, 91, 96, 97, 99, 100, 103, 104, 105, 106, 109–10, 118, 119, 123, 131, 137, 139, 141, 142, 149, 152, 154, 162, 164, 166, 169, 174, 175, 179, 180, 181–2, 187, 194, 195, 209, 211, 214, 217, 220, 221, 236, 239, 240–1, 243–4, 245, 246, 247, 249, 251, 256, 262, 267, 270, 276, 279, 280, 281, 288, 290, 291, 298, 300, 303, 308–9, 311, 337, 343, 357, 363, 367n3; English metaphoric names for animals, 314, 334; for knots, 146; for plants, 64, 120 etu. See pugilistic competitions Evans-Pritchard, E.E., 40–1, 42, 49, 64, 172, 366n3 faeces: animal faeces (defecation, droppings) in metaphor, 56–7, 82, 84, 104, 108, 116, 130, 143, 163, 197, 280, 317, 319, 350 fantail (bird), 198–200, 206, 223, 338, 349 finches, 162, 196–7, 314 fireflies, 292

INDEX

fish, 10, 25, 120, 154, 223, 243–4, 261, 262–7, 277–8, 279, 287, 309, 311, 314, 315, 321, 322, 323, 339, 341, 345, 351, 367n1 (ch. 6), 369n4; crayfish (see crustaceans); fish fry, 156, 243, 266, 278, 287, 306, 329, 351, 357, 367n1 (ch. 6); gobies, 10, 243, 261, 264–5, 315, 345; shark, 263–4, 278, 314. See also dolphins; eels; shellfish fleas: dog fleas, 291, 298–9 flies and mosquitoes, 280, 289–91, 298, 317, 318, 319, 349 Flores (Island), 3–4, 72, 80–1, 114, 117, 129, 130, 142, 152, 158, 226, 229, 236, 243, 261, 264, 275, 305, 365–6n1, 367n1 (ch. 6); animals’ introductions to, 68, 83, 91, 113, 122, 126, 146, 315; languages of, 4, 9, 34, 120, 125, 212 Flores giant rat. See Giant rats Flores green pigeon. See pigeons and doves flying foxes. See bats folk-generics, 10, 26, 53, 132, 162, 240, 241, 243, 279, 309, 310, 314, 326–7, 328; defined, 10; monomial naming of, 327; prominence in metaphor, 9–10, 26 folk-intermediates, 132, 162, 226, 316, 328; defined, 132 folk-specifics, 10, 54, 138, 162, 241, 243, 279, 310, 327, 367n2 (ch. 6), 368n1; defined, 10 friarbird, 11, 123, 166, 186, 193, 201–7, 213, 223, 234–5, 312, 313, 314, 321, 349, 351, 357 frogs, 64, 150, 243, 268–72, 278, 303, 308, 313, 314, 315, 317, 318–19, 321, 341, 346, 349, 350, 368n3 fruit-dove. See pigeons and doves games, 177, 260; children’s games, 126, 138, 292–3, 269, 294, 320; gambling games, 63. See also pugilistic competitions geckoes. See lizards: Tokay geckoes Geertz, C., 41 gender, 181, 208–9, 217, 334, 342, 343–5 Geo, Géro (region), 60, 116–17, 130, 231, 257, 342, 352 Giant rats, 48, 92, 127, 130–2, 133, 134–5, 153, 160, 312, 315, 316, 318, 328, 340, 342, 344, 348, 349, 357

383

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 384

goats, 9, 57, 80, 82, 83–90, 94, 108, 125, 144, 160, 163, 173, 315, 318, 328, 340, 342, 346, 347, 350, 351 goshawk. See birds of prey grasshoppers, 172, 267, 279, 280–2, 293, 309, 317, 319 ground-dove. See pigeons and doves grubs. See insect larvae hawk-owl. See owls herons and egrets, 211–12, 237, 313; nightheron, 101 hominoids: legendary hominoids, 237 homonymy: in motivation of metaphors, 166, 239, 329 house: as a metaphor, 60–1, 136–7, 301, 346–7 Howe, J., 35, 360 Huaulu, 40 human-animal contrast, xii, 6, 8–9, 18, 27, 30, 335, 358–61 humans: human referents of animal metaphors, 336–52; human body parts as referents, 10, 11, 26, 293, 338, 342; human physical features as referents, 146, 338, 344; human body parts as names of animals, 11 humour, xii, 73, 113, 353–4 Hunn, E., 313 hunting, xi, 4, 13, 29, 54, 75, 100, 107–8, 110, 126, 130, 132, 142, 154, 210, 214, 255, 266, 270, 292, 320, 324, 361; annual ritual hunt, 68, 69–70, 113, 122–3, 292, 295; hunting dogs, 75, 91, 98–9, 100, 272 huts: animal metaphors in naming of, 67, 103, 186 hyperbole, 6, 19, 123, 184, 255 Ilongot: concept of metaphor, 35, 41 Imperial pigeon. See pigeons and doves Indonesian national language, 4, 21, 30, 33, 34; metaphors in, 25, 89, 101, 117, 121, 124, 220, 266–7, 269, 286; terms for metaphor, 30. See also MalayoPolynesian languages Ingold, T., 28–30, 358, 362

384

insect larvae, 300–1, 309, 317, 350 insects. See invertebrates interpretation (of metaphor), xii, 14, 21–4, 30, 33, 35, 43–4, 51, 306, 316, 320, 353, 360, 365n2 invertebrates, 26, 258, 279–309, 310, 311, 312, 314, 315, 317, 321, 323, 325, 326, 329, 332, 336, 339, 341, 368n3 (ch. 8) irony, 6, 43, 126, 212 Jakobson, R., 6, 30, 37, 39, 41, 334 junglefowl, 128, 211, 214–16, 226, 227, 323, 337, 344, 346, 351 Kebi, 82, 86, 328, 342 Keesing, R., 41 Keo, 90, 110, 114, 133, 164, 196, 253, 257, 263, 290, 305 kestrel. See birds of prey kite. See birds of prey koel. See cuckoos Kövecses, Z., 7, 14 Labo (region), 60, 92, 98, 347 Lamaholot, 125 Latin, 36, 86, 101, 134 Lévi-Strauss, C., 9, 37–8, 40, 43, 334–5, 356 Lévy-Bruhl, L., 360 life forms, life form taxa, 25, 26, 53, 243, 279, 310, 314, 317, 324, 326, 327, 328, 332, 340, 341, 368n3; defined, 25; use in metaphor, 10, 243 Linnaeus, 50 Lio, 25, 34, 63, 67, 90, 110, 113, 133, 139, 183, 184, 190, 220, 229, 248, 257, 275, 276, 298, 306, 308, 365n1 (ch. 1), 365–6n1 (ch. 2) literacy, 4 lizards, xii, 92, 120, 175, 182, 243–4, 246, 247, 254–62, 277, 279, 283, 310, 312, 313, 314, 315, 319, 321, 322, 329, 341, 345, 348, 356, 357, 368–9n4; Flying lizards, 254, 277; House lizards, 254, 277; monitor lizards, xii, 92, 175, 182, 229, 247, 254–6, 277, 283, 310, 312, 319, 329, 341, 345, 348, 357, 368–9n4; skinks, 254, 257–8, 277, 318, 320, 322, 341; Tokay geckoes, 12, 254, 258–

INDEX

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 385

62, 265, 269, 277, 308, 312, 315, 317, 319, 338, 341, 351–2, 356 louse, lice, 126, 295 macaques. See monkeys magic, magical ritual, 37, 50, 250, 260, 293, 307, 321, 322, 324, 325, 331 Malayo-Polynesian languages, 4, 35, 83, 148, 267 mammals, 3, 25, 26–7, 48, 53–159, 174, 181, 189, 227, 243, 279, 287, 317, 321, 325, 326, 329, 333, 336, 340, 341, 342, 351, 368n3 (ch. 8); domestic mammal metaphors, 53– 121, 160, 326, 336–7, 340; predominance of mammals in metaphors, 26–7, 161, 310–15, 326–7, 333; wild mammal metaphors, 122–59, 160, 336–7, 340, 342; wild mammals as spirit livestock, 48, 323, 332 Manggarai, 120 mantis, 101, 283, 309, 319, 348 marriage, 4, 32–3, 58–9, 75–6, 77, 78, 80, 92, 98, 104, 111, 169, 173, 180–1, 185, 186, 283, 284, 287, 343, 345, 347, 366n4; polygyny, 77, 270; trial marriage, 152 metaphor: anthropological uses of “metaphor,” 28, 36–42, 43, 49, 343, 358, 360, 364; and belief, 49–51; cognitive distinctiveness of, 47, 49–50, 51, 321–2, 331, 359, 363–4; conceptual metaphor, 12–13, 41, 50, 81, 84–5, 100, 107, 114, 209, 346; conventional metaphor, 7–8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 24, 25, 27, 29, 30, 36–8, 39, 40, 41, 42, 47–8, 49, 50–1, 84, 190, 219, 313, 315, 322, 329, 330–2, 334, 343, 353, 360, 361, 363, 364; definition of metaphor, 5–6; empirical basis of animal metaphors, 15, 16–17, 48, 49, 51, 317–21; human metaphors, 355; influence on quasiempirical ideas, 134, 322; metaphors motivated by non-empirical ideas, 321– 2, 324, 325–6, 329–30; Nage concept of, 18, 30–6, 47, 50, 51, 365n1 (ch. 2); original Greek sense of “metaphor,” 5–6; private metaphor, 261; and simile, 17–19, 30, 38, 42, 365n3, 365n1 (ch. 2); social and moral

INDEX

use of metaphors, 336–52; social efficacy of animal metaphors, 352–4; source and target domains, 13–15, 17, 22, 36, 51, 335, 366n2; translation of, 21, 25; visual metaphor, 11. See also metonymy; motivation methods, field methods, 20–5 metonymy, 6–7, 17, 19, 36, 37, 39, 40, 43, 58, 176, 181, 366n4 mice. See rats and mice Midgley, M., 354 monkeys, 10, 13, 16, 92, 97, 117, 127, 129, 144, 146–59, 160, 189, 190, 245, 252, 260, 266– 7, 293, 305, 312, 315, 318, 321, 329, 335, 339, 340, 342, 343, 344, 346, 349, 350, 351, 357, 361; in Japan, 41 Montaine, M. de, 354 Morgan, J., 7 motivation, 14, 15–17, 19, 21–4, 25–6, 315– 26, 327–31, 356; cultural motivation, 16, 320–6, 328, 330 multitasking, 349 Munde (region), 125 mynah (bird), 222–3, 367n4 myth, myths, 3, 6, 16, 26, 37, 47, 113, 161, 190, 201, 207, 213, 235, 240, 264, 313, 321, 324, 325, 330, 331, 360 Nage, 3–5; central Nage, 4, 21; concept of metaphor. See also metaphor names, naming: animal names for human body parts, 11, 26, 338; animals named metaphorically after human body parts, 11; metaphorical names, 313–15, 321, 324, 330–1; monomial and binomial animal names, 240–1, 243, 276–8, 309, 326–7, 329, 367n4 naturalism, 13, 20, 27, 29, 51, 52, 358–9, 361, 369n4 neo-animism. See animism Ngadha, 25, 34, 65, 67, 89, 90, 102, 110, 112, 133, 138, 142, 153, 159, 183, 206, 248, 257, 276, 292, 296, 298, 299, 365–6n1 Ngadha-Lio language group, 25, 34 nitu. See spirits Nuer, 40–1, 42, 43, 49, 64, 67, 172, 184, 366n4

385

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 386

Ohnuki-Tierney, E., 41 omens: animals as, 98, 143, 144, 180, 184, 191, 200, 210, 220, 221, 223, 224, 324. See also augury onomatopoeia, 119, 169, 217, 222, 229, 236, 237, 239, 254, 259–60, 334 ontology, ontological pluralism, xii, 5, 12, 13, 27, 28–30, 38, 47, 49, 51–2, 271, 335, 336, 354, 355–64 oriole, 203–4, 223–4, 241, 321 Orwell, G., 310 owls, 164, 195, 219, 224–5, 323, 324, 331–2, 344; hawk-owl, 184, 225 Palmatier, R., 149, 240, 243–4, 279, 303, 311, 314, 367n3, 369n3 parallelism, parallelistic speech, 32, 83, 84, 92, 122, 156, 168, 210, 212, 216, 222, 266, 288–9, 308, 327, 329 pata néke (song genre), 31, 106, 130, 156, 171, 208, 209, 217, 231, 337, 343, 345 pata péle (Nage term for “metaphor”), 18, 30–6, 47, 50, 51, 365n1 (ch. 2) Peirce, C.S., 11 perspectivism, 46, 359 pets, pet animals, 96, 144, 145, 146, 155, 321 pigeons and doves, 19, 65, 162, 206, 208–9, 210–11, 212–14, 220, 225–7, 229–33, 235, 241, 312, 316, 318–19, 323, 328, 335, 347, 352, 367n4 pigs, 4, 11, 17, 33, 53, 54, 62, 64, 67, 69, 84, 85, 91–2, 100, 103–13, 122–3, 127, 152–3, 159, 160, 173, 181, 184, 195, 205, 252, 257, 272, 275–6, 297, 314, 315, 318, 320, 322, 326, 327, 328, 339, 339, 340, 346, 347, 351, 352, 357 plants: as Nage totems, 38; plant (botanical) metaphors, 39, 59, 85, 104, 127, 265, 333, 334; plant names incorporating animal metaphors, 10, 26, 34, 83, 313, 314, 315, 337 polysemy, 315, 316, 317 porcupines, 92, 97, 126–9, 130, 150, 153, 160, 195, 215, 227, 311, 312, 315, 328, 329, 337, 339, 340, 346, 357, 368n1 (ch. 8) prosody, prosodic effects, 17, 82, 86, 98, 127, 128, 133, 134, 144, 156, 157, 166, 168,

386

189, 193, 210, 216, 217, 227, 241, 267, 271, 285, 305, 327–8, 329 prototype theory, 7 proverbs, 23, 34, 55, 59–60, 127, 145, 176, 187, 191, 193, 201, 203, 211, 226, 266, 271, 308, 337–8, 352, 365n1 (ch. 2) pugilistic competitions (etu), 31, 62, 106, 116–17, 188, 202, 232, 266, 284, 287, 303, 352 quails, 19, 180, 211, 216, 226–8, 231, 232, 312, 328, 329, 331, 351 Radcliffe-Brown, A.R., 161 rainbow, 248 ranks. See social ranks rats and mice, 19, 53–4, 130, 132–40, 141, 142, 160, 227, 229, 246, 253, 307, 312–13, 314, 315, 318–19, 322, 329, 332, 340, 342, 344, 346, 349, 350, 356, 357, 368n1 (ch. 8). See also Giant rats; shrews reciprocal inversion, 46 Réndu (region), 116, 117, 125, 157–8, 266 rhyme. See prosody rice cultivation, 4, 48, 68, 70, 148–9, 281, 295, 301, 347 riddles, 307, 308 rites, ritual, 4, 6, 7, 11, 24, 37, 40, 44, 47, 50, 67, 69, 105, 107, 122, 207, 227, 234, 246, 287, 288, 313, 332; ritual language, 31, 34. See also hunting: annual ritual hunt; sacrifice Rosaldo, M., 41 sacrifice, sacrificial ritual, 4, 45, 48, 49, 50, 54, 55, 60, 67, 169, 184, 286, 287, 323, 359; sacrificial posts, 12, 24, 261, 275 scorpions, 302, 303, 307–8 scrubfowl, 228–9, 367n4 seaward or downstream direction (lau), 68–9, 92, 98, 124, 165, 191, 194, 210, 274 sex: sex differentiable terms, 63, 64, 89, 126–7, 133, 170, 181; sexual themes in metaphor, 13, 19, 31, 45, 58–9, 76–7, 81, 85, 89–90, 96, 98–100, 106–7, 133, 139, 156, 165, 174, 209, 217–18, 225, 256, 273, 296–7, 316, 343, 345, 346

INDEX

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 387

sheep, 63, 79–83, 86, 104, 160, 328, 340, 341, 342, 350 shellfish, 321 shrews, 130, 132, 133, 139–42, 160, 176, 312, 319, 340, 344, 350 Sikkanese, 34, 253 slugs, 11, 309, 319 snails, 308, 309, 317, 319 snakes, 10, 22, 157, 184, 229, 243–54, 256, 261, 276, 310, 312, 314, 315, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 329, 332, 339, 341, 344, 348, 350, 352, 368–9n4; bronzeback (snake), 157, 250–2, 277, 318, 322, 329, 348, 350, 351, 368–9n4; Flying snake, 276, 277; mock viper, 249, 314, 315; pipe snake, 247, 322; pit viper, 10, 182, 252–3, 277, 310, 361, 367n2; python, 10, 223, 252, 253, 274, 310, 313, 323; rat snake, 253, 277; Russell’s viper, 249, 250, 277, 338 So’a, 102, 112, 121, 126, 129, 258 social efficacy of animal metaphors. See metaphor social ranks, 4, 19–20, 45, 58–9, 64, 94, 134, 135, 220, 248, 297, 304, 334, 342 song, singing, 23, 31, 106, 165, 171, 188, 196, 198, 201, 208–9, 211, 220–1, 234, 239–40, 263, 281, 285, 292, 300, 303, 305, 308, 323, 324, 326, 327, 337; planting songs, 78, 166, 167, 168, 187, 191, 193, 199, 202, 206, 217, 222, 231, 235, 303, 305; songs of mourning, 43, 172, 177, 194, 209–10, 223, 225, 323; while circle-dancing, 92, 106, 130, 187, 217, 259–60, 266, 308; work songs, 196. See also pata néke soul, souls, 46, 67, 176–7, 191, 219–20, 225– 6, 240, 316, 322–3, 324, 331, 332, 336, 358, 359, 360, 361, 369n2, 369n4. See also spirits Sperber, D., 24, 39, 49–51 spiders, 112, 119–20, 279, 296, 302, 324, 349 spirits, spiritual or supernatural beings, 10, 45–8, 51, 55, 67, 105, 126, 169, 178, 184, 194, 213–14, 216, 219–20, 246, 250, 277, 313, 321, 322–4, 325, 330–3, 351, 359, 368n4; as inverted beings, 213, 332–3, 368n4. See also soul, souls stars, 113

INDEX

structuralism, 37, 38, 40, 41, 343 stubtail (bird), 199–200, 219, 233–4, 241, 321 Sumba, Sumbanese, 21, 107, 158, 227, 229, 264, 292, 369n1; Sumbanese concept of metaphor, 34, 35 sunbird, 123, 204, 234–5, 241, 321 swallows and swifts, 235, 357 symbolism: of animals, 3, 12, 20, 321–2, 330–1; cognitive approaches to, 24–5, 49–51, 321; and metaphor, 15, 26, 39, 50– 1, 363–4; and taxonomy, 44, 316; symbolic and utilitarian value, 324–6, 330; symbolic motivation of metaphors. See also motivation: cultural motivation synecdoche, 6, 11, 12, 43, 60, 92, 116, 298 synonymity: in animal metaphor, 16, 39, 70, 72, 74, 77, 110–11, 127, 131, 142, 144, 153, 211, 215, 235, 237, 245, 260, 269, 273, 274, 283 taboo, 40–1, 44, 50, 126, 146, 158, 247, 250, 298, 321, 331, 332, 341 tadpole, 268, 272, 278, 319, 348, 368n3 (ch. 6). See also frogs Tambiah, S., 39, 41 tattooing, 12 taxonomy, folk taxonomy, 9–10, 45, 53, 64, 101, 111, 112, 119, 130, 135, 138, 191, 196, 205, 221, 243, 247, 249, 261, 268, 279, 280, 281, 285, 304, 313, 314, 316, 325–6, 328 termites, 298, 300, 319 Thais, 39, 41 toddy, 106, 123, 142, 169, 173, 175, 235. See also Arenga palm totemism, 9, 37–9, 42, 43, 161, 334–5, 356, 359, 366n3; in Nage, 38 transformation: beliefs in animal transformation, 54, 67, 143, 240, 264, 268, 317, 360 Turner, V., 23 turtles, 229, 275–6, 314, 347 Tylor, E. B., 358 ‘Ua, 82, 86, 225, 227, 229, 272, 328, 342 universals, xii, 12, 209, 273, 327, 364 urine, urination, 55, 74, 94, 102, 197, 331, 339

387

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 388

utilitarian motivation of metaphors. See motivation: cultural motivation utilitarianism in anthropology, 325–6 Valeri, V., 39–40 Verheijen, J.A.J., 67, 102, 112, 113, 120, 121, 126, 138, 183, 248, 258 vipers. See snakes Viveiros de Castro, 30, 46, 52, 358, 359, 361 war, warfare, 69–70, 124, 362 wasps, 112, 279, 280, 283–5, 309, 319, 347, 348 water buffalo. See buffalo waterhen, 11, 23, 101, 211, 237–9 weaving, 12, 368–9n4; textile motifs, 281–2

388

West, H.G., 46 whistler (bird), 223, 227, 239–40, 321, 324 wife-givers and wife-takers, 4, 62, 78, 87, 110–11, 169, 173, 175–6, 178, 181, 185, 283, 342, 347, 366n4 Willis, R., 366n3 witches, 9, 46, 67, 69, 92–3, 115, 164, 180, 184, 190, 192, 194, 219, 221, 225, 307, 322, 323, 324, 332; as inverted beings, 163–4 witu tui bird, 236, 321 wood-carving. See carving Yoruba, 45, 337 zoomorphism, 356

INDEX

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page i

A DOG PISSING AT THE EDGE OF A PATH

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page ii

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page iii

G R E G O RY F O RT H

A DOG PI SSI NG AT THE EDGE OF A PATH Animal Metaphors in an Eastern Indonesian Society

McGill-Queen’s University Press Montreal & Kingston

•

London

•

Chicago

© McGill-Queen’s University Press 2019 isbn 978-0-7735-5922-6 (cloth) isbn 978-0-7735-5923-3 (paper) isbn 978-0-2280-0004-4 (epdf) isbn 978-0-2280-0005-1 (epub) Legal deposit fourth quarter 2019 Bibliothèque nationale du Québec Printed in Canada on acid-free paper that is 100% ancient forest free (100% post-consumer recycled), processed chlorine free

We acknowledge the support of the Canada Council for the Arts. Nous remercions le Conseil des arts du Canada de son soutien.

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Title: A dog pissing at the edge of a path : animal metaphors in an eastern Indonesian society / Gregory Forth. Names: Forth, Gregory, author. Description: Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: Canadiana (print) 20190171820 | Canadiana (ebook) 20190171944 | isbn 9780773559226 (cloth) | isbn 9780773559233 (paper) | isbn 9780228000044 (epdf) | isbn 9780228000051 (epub) Subjects: lcsh: Metaphor—Social aspects—Indonesia—Flores Island. | lcsh: Animals—Social aspects—Indonesia—Flores Island. | lcsh: Human-animal relationships—Indonesia—Flores Island. | lcsh: Nage (Indonesian people)—Social life and customs. | lcsh: Nage (Indonesian people)—Ethnozoology—Indonesia— Flores Island. Classification: lcc p301.5.m48 f67 2019 | ddc 306.442/99221—dc23

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page v

For my wife, Christine

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page vi

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page vii

Contents

Figures and Tables Preface

•

ix

•

xi

Note on Orthography 1 Introductory Matters

xv

•

•

3

2 Metaphors and “Metaphor” in Human-Animal Relations 3 Domestic Mammal Metaphors – and Some Wild Variants 4 Mammals in Metaphor: Exclusively Wild Kinds 5 Talking with Birds

•

•

28

• •

53

122

161

6 Other Non-Mammals in Metaphor: Snakes, Lizards, Fish, Frogs, and More

243

•

7 Metaphors with Bugs: Insects and Other Invertebrates

•

279

8 The Differential Metaphorical Value of Different Animals

•

310

9 Animal Metaphors in Social and Ontological Perspective

•

336

Notes

•

365

References Index

•

•

381

371

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page viii

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page ix

Figures and Tables

Figures All photographs taken by author unless otherwise specified. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Buffalo with a nose-ring (No. 7) • 56 “Dove” and “buffalo” coconuts (No. 25) • 66 Horses about to be led to pasture (No. 40) • 71 Balinese cow (No. 60) • 80 Goat on a rock (No. 74) • 87 Newly acquired dog, chained (No. 103) • 99 Sow with piglets (No. 123) • 107 Slaughtering pigs in the traditional manner (No. 127) • 109 Cat with a bent tail (No. 144) • 115 Hunters at a shrine, annual ritual hunt (No. 163) • 123 Porcupines in a cage (No. 172) • 128 Dog with Giant rat (No. 176) • 131 Hunter with Giant rat (No. 179) • 132 “Rat’s tail” (No. 196) • 140 Pet civet (No. 206) • 145 “Civet’s vulva” (No. 208) • 147 Pet monkey (No. 231) • 155 Tethered cock with owner (No. 260) • 170 Male speckled fowl (No. 281) • 179 Fantail (No. 332). Donna McKinnon • 199 Man with “Fantail’s Tail” hair (No. 334) • 200

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page x

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Friarbird (No. 337). Donna McKinnon • 203 Junglefowl cock (No. 365) • 215 Injured Black-naped oriole (No. 387) • 224 Young Barred doves (No. 401) • 230 “Dove droppings” (No. 408) • 233 Waterhen (No. 416) • 238 Viper tree (No. 433) • 251 Grasshopper eggs motif (No. 496) • 282 Gourd-shell vessels (No. 532) • 297 Tables

1 2 3 4

x

Totals of metaphors involving different mammals • 160 Examples of synonymity in animal metaphors • 318–19 Cultural factors motivating animal metaphors • 325 Human values in animal metaphors: life forms and selected individual categories • 340–1

F I G U R E S A N D TA B L E S

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xi

Preface

This book started off as a remnant of another (Forth 2016). When some years ago I began writing a monograph on the folk zoology of the Nage people of eastern Indonesia – the various kinds of knowledge they possessed concerning non-human animals – I planned to include a comprehensive coverage of animal metaphors. However, it soon became apparent that Nage animal metaphors were far too numerous to treat adequately in that volume, and that a separate book would be in order. Especially from further field research conducted between 2014 and 2018, I also realized that I had rather more to say about how Nage understood metaphor and about the concept of metaphor in general. More particularly, it became clear that the Nage regard standard (or “conventional”) animal metaphors, including the majority that use animals to talk about humans and human behaviours, ultimately as fictions. That is, they recognize that a person spoken of as a “dog pissing at the edge of a path,” say, is not really a dog nor, by virtue of certain actions, has she or he temporarily become a dog. And conversely, they know that using dogs and other animals to speak about humans – the fact that humans and animals can be brought together in this manner – does not mean that these creatures are in some essential sense human. Expressed another way, people in this small-scale eastern Indonesian community of cultivators, hunters, and raisers of livestock understand their metaphors in much the same way as Westerners understand theirs – as special ways of speaking and not as articulations of radically different ways of experiencing the world. In fact, many Nage metaphors are closely comparable to animal metaphors found in English, if not always in regard to the animals

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xii

employed, then in specific animal behaviours or interpretations recognized by their users – a finding that should attract the attention of anyone interested in human cognition and human universals. Readers will thus discover, for example, that both in English and in the language of a small eastern Indonesian island, muscles are referred to with words that ultimately mean “mouse”; that duplicity is conveyed by an animal (the monitor lizard) with a forked tongue; that the straight tail of a civet stands for honesty; and that the dog metaphor from which this book takes its title is closely comparable to the anglophone expression “to piss about.” To many readers, or at least many of those who are not anthropologists, this finding may not come as much of a surprise. However, in recent years a number of anthropologists have advanced a view of metaphor as a peculiarly Western concept that many of their colleagues have unwittingly imposed on their ethnographic subjects. What is more, writers who have been described as “ontological pluralists” (discussed at some length in chapter 9) have argued that non-Westerners – or some ill-defined portion of them – understand the contrast of “human” and “animal” in a fundamentally different way from modern Westerners. It has further been suggested that such people do not possess animal metaphors, at least not in the sense this term is understood in reference to English (or European language) usage. My aim in this book is to demonstrate, through an extensive and detailed exploration of the animal metaphors of one non-Western society – one I know particularly well from some thirty-five years of field research – that this view is fundamentally incorrect. Although I am an anthropologist, this book is not written exclusively for anthropologists but, rather, for anyone interested in the topic of metaphor. As such it should appeal to several different audiences. In addition to anthropologists and linguists concerned either with the phenomenon or concept of metaphor, more specialist readers would include philosophers of language, Southeast Asianists, people involved in the study of specific languages and literatures, and – since Nage animal metaphors employ 140 animal kinds, the large majority corresponding to single species – perhaps even zoologists, ethologists, and ecologists. Regardless of specific disciplinary interests, moreover, the book is constructed as a comparative resource, a reference work of sorts, for anyone interested in any aspect of animal metaphors. Indeed, I very much wish I had had something similar available for a language other than English while researching and writing the present volume.

xii

P R E FA C E

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xiii

On the other hand, more general readers might read the book simply to discover similarities and differences between the animal metaphors of a small eastern Indonesian community and those with which they are familiar from their own language, which is most likely to be English. By the same token, the 566 metaphors that compose the core of the book could be read mainly for pleasure; in fact, many may be found not only insightful and imaginative but also aesthetically appealing and, in some instances, even humorous – thus replicating an assessment by Nage people themselves. Such readers might therefore leave the first two and the last two chapters and proceed directly to chapters 3 to 7. Nevertheless, I hope that, however readers’ interests are motivated, a perusal of individual metaphors will encourage them to turn to the general discussions on the nature of metaphor (and especially animal metaphors) found in the first two and last two chapters. Whatever success can be claimed for the present study is due mainly to the generous assistance of Nage friends and associates who, for three and a half decades, have allowed me to participate in many aspects of their lives. It would be impossible to mention everyone who, knowingly or unknowingly, has provided me with insight into Nage metaphors. Nevertheless, special thanks are owed to several regular commentators, including (in no particular order): Fidelis Laja Ga’e, Theresia Mea Béli, Joseph Méze Bha, Agnes Wula Meno, Fidelis Lowa Sada, Cornelis Kodhi Léjo, Gaspar Wélu Déde, Laurens Toda, Yohanes Soda Ule, Stefanus Ngato, Rofina Ule, Petrus Lape Ga’e, David Waghi, Arnoldus Nuwa Bupu, Ambrosius Busa, and Petronela Bolo. In addition, I wish to give separate mention to four men who helped me, not just with my study of metaphor but with a variety of ethnographic investigations, but who, sadly, died during the course of my research – namely, Emiel Waso Ea (decd. 1994), Thomas Cola Bha (2008), Eperadus Dhoi Léwa (2018), and Cyrilus Bau Engo (also 2018). I am also grateful to the editorial staff at McGill-Queen’s University Press and especially to editor-in-chief Jonathan Crago, who from the beginning has given me consistent support and encouragement and has expeditiously seen the manuscript through to final publication. Another debt is owed to two anonymous readers, who evidently expended considerable time and effort in reviewing the manuscript and offering suggestions for improvement. Field research for this project was funded mostly from grants awarded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Since 1984, when I first visited Nage country, research visits to Indonesia were sponsored

P R E FA C E

xiii

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xiv

by the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (lipi), Nusa Cendana and Artha Wacana Universities in Kupang, and St Paul’s Major Seminary in Ledalero, Flores. The assistance provided by all of these bodies is greatly appreciated. Finally, thanks are due to Donna McKinnon for producing line drawings of two birds I was unable to photograph: the fantail and the friarbird (figures 20 and 22). Gregory Forth January 2019

xiv

P R E FA C E

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xv

Note on Orthography

Vowels English comparisons are approximate: /a/ (as in “cat”) /é/ (as in “bay”) /e/ in the first syllable of bisyllabic words is the schwa, tending sometimes to a short /e/ as in English “get.” In monosyllables (e.g., me, “to bleat [of a goat]”) and in the second syllable of bisyllabic words (e.g., Nage, pronounced roughly as “Na-gay”) it is pronounced as /é/, as it is when followed or preceded by a glottal stop (as in le’e, “bow”). In these instances the sound is not written as é, in the interests of parsimony and also to accord with the practice of literate Nage themselves. /i/ (as in “fit”) /o/ (as in “dot”) /u/ (as in “root”) Consonants All consonants have approximately the same value they do in English, with the following exceptions: /bh/, an implosive /b/ /c/, pronounced as in “chat” /dh/, an implosive /d/

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page xvi

/gh/, voiced velar fricative /ng/, always pronounced as in “singer,” never as in “finger” /’/ marks the glottal stop, which occurs only initially or between vowels (see ‘é’e, “ugly, plain”).

xvi

NOTE ON ORTHOGRAPHY

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 1

A DOG PISSING AT THE EDGE OF A PATH

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 2

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 3

1 Introductory Matters

English-speakers, and most likely speakers of any language, will be familiar with the common practice of calling people by an expression incorporating an animal name (English examples include “a rat,” “a fat pig,” “a sly fox”) or comparing someone to an animal (“strong as an ox,” “mad as a March hare”). They will also be aware that such expressions are commonly employed when describing the character, actions, attitudes, circumstances, abilities, or appearance of a human individual or human collectivity. I have written this book in the conviction that metaphors incorporating animals are an important part of any society’s knowledge of both non-human animals and of themselves, and are therefore essential to a comprehensive and properly informed understanding of a human community’s relations, both conceptual and practical, with fellow humans as well as with other zoological kinds. As a way people talk about other humans, there appears to be a widespread consensus that animal categories are an especially prominent, even the most prominent, kind of category deployed metaphorically the world over (e.g., Lawrence 1993, 301; see also Fernandez 1986, 11–14). Similar observations have been made concerning the very regular occurrence of animals in myth, augury, and other forms of cultural symbolism (Hunn 2011; Forth 2017a). By reviewing the metaphors of one non-Western society – a corpus of 566 expressions incorporating 140 different categories of mammals, birds, and animals of other kinds recorded over a period of more than thirty years – one purpose of this book is to shed light on this symbolic prominence. The people in question are the Nage (pronounced approximately as “Na-gay”), who inhabit the central part of the island of Flores in eastern Indonesia. More

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 4

particularly, I focus on a population of some twelve thousand people whom I have previously distinguished as “central Nage,” residing in the vicinity of the village of Bo’a Wae, the political and cultural centre of a larger region that, since colonial times, has been designated as Nage. All metaphors discussed below are therefore drawn from the dialect of central Nage (see Orthography), which, like all Flores Island languages, belongs to a grouping designated as Central-Malayo-Polynesian. As described in previous publications, central Nage people, although increasingly involved in a monetary economy, make their living as cultivators, raisers of livestock, and hunters. Rice grown in irrigated fields has for several decades been the principal crop, but Nage still plant maize and other cereals as well as a variety of tubers, green vegetables, fruits, and other cultigens. During roughly the same period, the majority of central Nage have converted to Roman Catholicism. Yet they maintain an indigenous spiritual cosmology and continue to perform associated rituals, and most Nage still observe traditional marriage rules and preferences, including clan or lineage exogamy, marriage within one of two hereditary ranks (sometimes described as “nobles” and “slaves”), and a modified system of asymmetric affinal alliance (requiring a strict distinction between “wife-givers” and “wife-takers”). Major rites involve animal sacrifice. The most valued sacrificial victims are water buffalo, animals that, together with horses and smaller livestock, continue to form a major and essential part of a bridewealth (goods given for a wife by the husband’s group), while pigs are an important part of the bride’s group’s counter-gift. Exploring various forms of knowledge and practice concerning both wild and domestic animals, Nage folk zoology is the subject of a recent book entitled Why the Porcupine Is Not a Bird (Forth 2016). A Dog Pissing at the Edge of a Path extends and complements that book, and references to the earlier work are made throughout. As literacy was introduced to Nage less than one hundred years ago, specifically by missionaries teaching partly in Dutch but mostly in Malay (the language that was to become the basis of the Indonesian national language), Nage are heirs to an exclusively oral tradition, and the metaphors I discuss below directly reflect this tradition. Apart from documenting several hundred metaphorical expressions and demonstrating the variety, complexity, and aesthetic and philosophical value of animal metaphors in use among members of a small-scale, non-Western society, the present book aims to address more general issues in the study of metaphor. One such issue concerns how

4

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 5

far the ultimately European concept of “metaphor” resonates in a very different language and tradition – or, otherwise expressed, it concerns the extent to which Nage metaphors correspond to what anglophones, say, would regard as metaphor, and how Nage ideas about these correspond to the Western concept of metaphor. In regard to animal metaphors specifically, a study of Nage usages further facilitates an exploration of what metaphors reveal about human-animal relations – for example, the place of metaphors in relation to knowledge of various kinds about non-human animals maintained by members of a particular society, and the part, practical or otherwise, that animals play in human lives. Yet another question concerns what metaphors may reveal about cultural variation in perceptions of differences and similarities between humans and non-human animals, and, moreover, how animal metaphors may reflect, but also inform, ideas about human behaviour, social values, and representations of different categories of people. All this bears on a particular issue in current anthropology – namely, the ontological question of whether, in what they say about and how they act towards animals, different societies display fundamental differences in conceptions of the relation between non-human animals and humans (see e.g., Descola 2013; Ingold 2011; Viveiros de Castro 2014). Investigating how a society’s standard metaphors can contribute to this debate is a major objective of this book. “Metaphor,” “Animal,” and Other Matters Using the term in a fairly broad sense, though more particularly as a reference to semantic relations (how words convey meanings), metaphor is pervasive in natural languages. One could go so far as to say that it is an aspect of most if not all linguistic utterances. To cite some familiar instances, in English one not only speaks, necessarily, of the “hands” of a clock, the “legs” of a table, or the “eye” of a needle but also of the “flow” of speech and the “root” of a problem or of a word. As these examples suggest, in any language many metaphors are not recognized as such, and in this connection we speak, again metaphorically, of “dead” as opposed to “living metaphors” – even though the difference between these is sometimes difficult to determine. (Does a clock really have “hands”?) “Metaphor” (ultimately from Greek metapherein, “transfer,” Shorter Oxford English Dictionary) can be defined as any representation in which a category

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

5

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 6

or concept from one semantic domain is transferred or carried over to a different domain. Thus, in the examples cited above, parts of the human body are transferred to the domains of chronometers and needles (both material artefacts), and a property of liquids is transferred to human speech or time (things that are immaterial or at least not directly visible). Questions have been raised about the delimitation of semantic domains and how far these might vary cross-culturally. Thus, some anthropologists might question whether non-Westerners conceive of human beings and non-human animals as belonging to two different “domains” or, if they do, whether the domains are distinguished in the same way as Westerners would distinguish them. These are matters I deal with later, but for the moment I would just mention that Nage ethnography reveals that these eastern Indonesians conceive of humans and animals as quite different sorts of beings, and that they appear to do so in much the same way as do ordinary speakers of English. Given that metaphor entails what are recognized as two different domains, the concept equally requires that things belonging to these domains are sufficiently similar and comparable that one can be employed to represent the other. Indeed, similarity and substitutability (the possibility of substituting one thing with another, e.g., a brave man with a lion) are the crucial features of metaphor that Roman Jakobson identifies in distinguishing metaphor as one of the two major forms of meaning creation in natural languages (see Jakobson and Halle 1956). The other is metonymy, which by contrast involves contiguity and displacement – as, for example, when “crown” refers to a monarch or the institution of monarchy. As this example also demonstrates, with metonymy a term and its referent belong to the same domain. As linguists and anthropologists are aware, these two categories have been treated as components of a longer series of “tropes” (types of figurative language) that further includes synecdoche and hyperbole. Yet metaphor and metonymy are regarded as the basic types, while synecdoche (using a particular instance to refer to a general entity or vice versa) and hyperbole (substituting a greater for a lesser quality or degree) can be understood as variants of metonymy, as perhaps can irony (replacing a thing with its contrary). At the same time, metaphor and metonymy have been applied to more than verbal utterances and especially to identify contrasting structural properties of representations expressed, for example, in ritual, myth, and spiritual cosmology. Regarding humans and animals, anthropologists will be familiar with interpretations of the Bororo identification of their men with red macaws (a species of parrot,

6

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 7

Ara macao) – an identification partly played out in ritual – as an idea grounded in both metaphoric and metonymic relations (Crocker 1977a; T. Turner 1991). Metonymy too has been treated as a variety of metaphor. If nothing else, this demonstrates the complexity (and lack of consistency) encountered in the analytical deployment of all these terms. However, when I speak of Nage “animal metaphors,” I use “metaphor” in the commonest sense to refer to conventional expressions in which statements describing animals or animal behaviours are used to talk about things that, for language-users, are not animals and that for the most part include human beings and attributes, behaviours, circumstances, and conditions differentially distributed or manifest among human individuals. By describing such expressions as “conventional” I follow Kövecses (2010, 33–4), who employs the term not to mean “arbitrary” (as in other linguistic and semiotic usage) but simply “well established and well entrenched” through regular use. Synonymous designations include Morgan’s (1993, 129) “institutionalized metaphor” and “stored metaphor,” defined as usages “with which everyone is familiar” and that, by contrast to metaphors that a person has not previously encountered, do not need “figuring out.” (At the same time, Morgan notes that conventional metaphors are not “idioms,” by which he means phrases that are not intelligible from analysis or translation of their parts and so must be comprehended as wholes.) Metaphors, including animal metaphors, can of course also be ideolectal – peculiar to individuals, single families, or other small groups of people – or the novel constructions of authors of poetry or other forms of creative or rhetorical speech or writing. It can be readily assumed that all conventional metaphors ultimately derive from the innovative constructs of single men and women. But equally obviously, such verbal inventions are ones that have survived and spread within a larger population, albeit possibly undergoing change with increasing use, and to that extent they are ways of talking about things that are shared and social – which is to say, “conventional.” (The extent to which such metaphors reflect common ways of thinking, about animals, for example, is another matter, which I consider in later chapters.) In prototype theory (e.g., Lakoff 1987), in which a single animal name (e.g., English “rat”) is conventionally applied to humans, the non-animal gloss (e.g., “a despicable person”) can be taken as a peripheral or less central sense of the name’s primary or prototypical meaning (e.g., “a kind of animal”).

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

7

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 8

Thus, in dictionaries one regularly finds metaphorical senses of a term listed after the primary sense. The same would apply, for example, to a word like “father,” which primarily means “male parent” but has secondary (nonprototypical) senses like “Catholic priest” or “founder (e.g., of a nation or academic discipline).” Yet this does not mean that English speakers employing “rat,” for example, to refer to a human being would not usually recognize that the person in question and the small murine creature are quite different sorts of living things or, otherwise expressed, belong to different domains. As far as conventional metaphors are concerned, what applies to English and other European languages applies equally to Nage. Thus, linking humans and particular animals in regularly expressed and culturally standard ways, Nage animal metaphors can be analyzed as employing members of an “animal domain” to talk about members of a “human domain.” These specifications work for Nage because they too distinguish “animals” and “humans” by name – respectively, as ana wa and kita ata (Forth 2016, 52–61). And these named categories correspond closely to “animal” and “human” as ordinarily understood by anglophones, even though, unlike educated anglophones, Nage do not conceive of humans (kita ata) as a subclass of animals (ana wa). As the Nage word for “animal,” ana wa deserves further attention partly because the term itself has metaphorical uses. Besides serving as a higher-order folk taxon encompassing all non-human animals, Nage also apply ana wa to small children. According to their own view, the usage is motivated by the fact that young children lack powers of understanding and communication, making them comparable to non-human creatures. At the same time, ana wa may be doubly metaphoric insofar as ana has as its primary sense “child, immature human,” as revealed in a local interpretation of ana wa as meaning “children (or people) of the wind” (Forth 1989). Nevertheless, besides “child, young person (and young animal),” ana has other senses, including a small version or portion of something and a subordinate or member of a collectivity (as in ana tana, a person who is native to a territory, tana). In fact, it is probably this last sense, rather than “child,” that is relevant to ana wa, “animal,” and moreover to another Nage usage, where ana alone refers to individual animals in relation to the larger kind (as in the question ana apa ke?, “what [kind of] animal is that?”). How wa should be understood is more controversial. Although central Nage sometimes understand it as the word for “wind” (wa, angi wa), other evidence suggests a relation with the homonym wa (wera in other Nage dialects

8

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 9

and central Flores languages), which denotes the malevolent or “wild” spiritual essence of a witch (Forth 1989).1 As the Nage categories “animal” and “human” are not related taxonomically, it follows that any Nage statement identifying the two domains – like describing a person as a urinating dog or a human child as an animal – will be metaphorical. Especially for metaphors in regular use, this is confirmed by the fact that Nage themselves normally recognize their figurative character, that is, as references to subjects (including small children, regardless of how unsocialized they may be) that they would not normally regard as animals – just as an English-speaker describing someone as an “old goat” or a “pig” will ultimately realize that the person in question belongs to the species Homo sapiens and not to a species of the zoological genera Capra or Sus. Speaking of genera and species, it is worth pointing out that with animal metaphors, the animal – the member of the animal domain expressly named in the metaphor – is an entire category of animals. In contrast, the metaphorical referent, the member of the human domain, is typically a person, or occasionally a collection of persons, or at best a social rather than a taxonomic category. The distinction also obtains where metaphors employ a part or particular feature of an animal (as in “a dog’s hind leg” or “a pig’s eye”) since in these instances the item typically pertains to the entire species whereas the referent, particularly if it is human, remains a specific behaviour or attribute – and usually one distinguishing the person referred to from other people in relation to a socially recognized norm. In regard to this “whole-part” relationship, conventional animal metaphors evidently have something in common with animal totemism, whereby people belong to different groups associated with different animals, and which Lévi-Strauss (1963) argued was founded on a structural relation of “metaphor.” This observation applies as much to English and other languages as it does to Nage. Thus, to cite familiar English examples, terms like “lion,” “fox,” or “rat” refer not to features common to all members of the species Homo sapiens but only to some people, and then often only some people some of the time or in the context of particular activities or relationships. However, it is here that the similarity between totemism and conventional animal metaphor ends. Equally important are the differences, a matter I take up in chapters 2 and 8. As demonstrated elsewhere (Forth 2016), the animal (or “folk zoological”) categories Nage employ in their animal metaphors are for the very most part

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

9

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 10

what ethnobiologists call “folk-generics” – units of any folk taxonomy that tend to coincide with the species and genera of international biosystematics. For example, the folk-generic category that Nage name ‘o’a, “monkey,” a component of over thirty Nage metaphors, coincides with the species Macaca fascicularis, the Crab-eating macaque. English examples of folk-generics include “dog,” “cat,” “hawk,” “crow,” “rattlesnake,” and “salmon,” but not “snake” or “fish,” which anglophones would normally understand as names of more inclusive animal kinds. A minority of Nage metaphors employ categories corresponding to “snake” (nipa) and “fish” (ika) – as of course does English (“fish out of water,” “snake in the grass”) – but in the Nage corpus these are very much exceptions that prove the rule. In addition, a few metaphors use “folk-specifics” – categories that form subclasses of folk-generics (e.g., English “sparrowhawk” in relation to “hawk”) – but folk-specifics too occur in only a small number of Nage usages. Although not all folk-generics that compose Nage folk taxonomy bear regular names (Forth 2016, 38–9), all that occur in conventional metaphors naturally do. And it is significant that where Nage employ more inclusive animal categories as metaphors, like the aforementioned “fish” and “snake,” these are the only categories of this type – “life form taxa” in the lexicon of ethnobiology – that are named and, furthermore, are named with single lexemes (words), such as nipa (snake) and ika (fish). This is not to suggest that the possession of a distinct name is the main determinant of the metaphorical use of a given kind of animal. More than other types of animal categories, folk-generics (categories like “monkey,” “dog,” “hawk,” and so on) compose gestalts, components or “chunks” (D’Andrade 1995) of the natural world that present themselves as ineluctable wholes in a universal human perception. And in regard to their overall physical and behavioural homogeneity the same can be argued for snakes and fish, especially by comparison with internally more diverse categories like “mammal” and even “bird.” At the same time, Nage employ particular kinds of snakes in conventional metaphorical expressions (e.g., “python” and “pit viper”) as they also do several sorts of “fish” (e.g., “dolphin” and “Loach goby”). Animal metaphors also occur in Nage naming of human body parts (e.g., the finger tips, called “rhinoceros beetle’s rump”), trees and other plants, spiritual beings, types of buildings, other artefacts, objects, and even other animals – as in “sky dog,” naming both a cricket and a kind of bird. But these are far less common than metaphors applied to humans, which moreover

10

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 11

mostly comprise phrases describing an animal engaged in a certain act or in a particular situation (“a dog pissing at the edge of a path”) rather than simply an unqualified animal name or a phrase describing part of an animal. And while I include instances of these other forms of animal metaphor (in chapters 3 to 7), they are a secondary concern since the majority of Nage animal metaphors do indeed describe humans and human behaviour. As is common among other peoples, Nage use animals’ names as personal names and place names, but as I discuss these in earlier writings (Forth 2004a; Forth 2016), I do not include them here. Also not discussed are metaphorical names of animals that refer, for example, to the human body (e.g., toko ata, “human bone,” a stick insect; lema la, “protruding tongue,” slug) – thus the inverse of animal names applied to human body parts. Nor do I deal exhaustively with binary composites, standard expressions comprising two animal names that refer synecdochically to a larger grouping of animals (Forth 2016, 140–8). Expressions of this sort are listed only when they are further employed as conventional metaphors – for example, when lako wawi (“dog [and] pig”) refers to reproved human behaviours deemed animal-like. English-speakers will be familiar with animal metaphors that employ animal names as verbs, as in “rat on (someone),” “weasel out,” and “snake along” (said of a river or road). Such usages are relatively uncommon in Nage, and in fact I encountered just two possible instances, both involving birds. One is kuku raku, “waterhen,” used to describe people crowding around something by reference to the bird’s remarkable cries (see metaphor No. 417 in chapter 5). The other is kobe koka, “friarbird night” (No. 351), referring to a practice whereby a day is deliberately deleted from a lengthy ritual undertaking. The apparent rarity of such usages, however, appears mostly to be a function of syntactical differences between the two languages, as human behaviours expressed by verbal uses of “rat” and “weasel” in English, for example, are identified by other animal metaphors – as when Nage describe an evasive person, or someone who “weasels” out of things, as possessing “a cat’s waist” (No. 153). Animals also figure in what has been called “visual metaphor,” a notion similar to “icon” in Peirce’s (1930–35) typology (for an anthropological treatment, see Leach 1976, 10, 12). Examples familiar to Westerners include the association of specific animals with yoga positions, popular dances, human sexual positions, and martial arts poses, where the human body is disposed in a way that notionally resembles the form or movement of an animal. Visual

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

11

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 12

metaphors of these sorts are also rare among Nage, although two bird metaphors partly refer to dance movements (Nos. 306 and 414). It may be no coincidence that depictions of animal figures are similarly uncommon in Nage graphic art. The only weaving motif named after an animal is “grasshopper eggs” (No. 496), and while carved figures in wood on buildings and sacrificial posts include horses and domestic fowls, just two conventional motifs, both abstract geometric patterns, are named after animals (the Tokay gecko and the crocodile, Nos. 457 and 489, respectively). Tattooing seems not to have been a traditional practice in Nage (cf. Van Suchtelen 1919–21). Although nowadays one occasionally sees people with tattoos, animal figures are hardly evident among the designs, which usually consist of no more than a cross or the person’s initials. Generally, then, animal symbolism among Nage finds expression for the most part in verbal media, including commonly rehearsed cosmological ideas and traditional narratives as well as conventional metaphors. More on “Metaphor”: Some Analytical Distinctions Both linguists and anthropologists have used “metaphor” in several different ways. For present purposes, a major contrast concerns, on the one hand, “conventional metaphor,” standard expressions encountered in everyday speech and exemplified by English “snake in the grass,” and, on the other, what has been called “conceptual metaphor” (Lakoff and Johnson 1980; Kövecses 2010). Conceptual metaphors are general themes reflected in individual metaphors. These are discernible in all languages and some would appear to be universal. Like the English example just employed, Nage animal metaphors applied to humans manifest the conceptual metaphor “people are animals” (Kövecses 2010, 153, 282, 342), or “humans = animals.” This of course is never explicitly stated by Nage, nor often by anglophones, and, as a conceptual metaphor, it is of course distinct from the scientific identification of Homo sapiens, along with other primates, as members of a more inclusive taxon labelled “animal” (see Forth 2016). Anthropologists may notice that “people are animals” inverts a central proposition of “neo-animism,” part of a recent “ontological turn” (Holbraad and Pedersen 2017), according to which, for members of some small-scale societies at least, “animals are people.” Within this latter framework, moreover, the first proposition might well

12

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 13

be construed as a product of a contrasting ontology known as “naturalism” (sensu Descola 2013) – another issue I rejoin in later chapters. Nage animal metaphors reveal other conceptual metaphors, for example, “having sex = eating (and sex = food),” “male sexual exploits = hunting” (see Nos. 125, 353), and “honesty = straightness” (Nos. 62, 144, 206). These too reveal how connections linguists have uncovered in English metaphors are equally discernible in Nage – a finding of the present study that raises important questions about how far themes identified as conceptual metaphors are culturally specific as opposed to possessing a broader basis in panhuman experience or cognition. Several pairs of terms have been used to distinguish the two parts of a metaphor, in the present case the animal and the non-animal to which an animal metaphor refers. Among the most important are “source” and “target,” developed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980) in the exploration of conceptual metaphor. As the term suggests, “source” defines the domain that supplies concepts and terms used to talk about a “target,” that is, the topic of discourse or the implicit reference of the metaphor – most often human beings in the case of animal metaphors. Linguists thus talk about items from the source domain being “mapped onto” the target domain. “Source” and “target” are also serviceable in analyzing specific conventional metaphors, though in this context the terms admit further distinctions. Thus, where “animal” is the source, the sub-source, as it were, is a specific animal (a dog, rat, or snake), further specified as the “vehicle” of the metaphor. At the same time, “vehicle” can be used, more specifically, to describe a specific animal revealing particular qualities or involved in a specific action – our eponymous “urinating dog” again. Also pertaining to the source domain is what Dirven (1994) calls the “image” or “stereotype” of the entity named in the vehicle. With regard to animal metaphors, these terms describe the knowledge of the empirical animal possessed by a specific ethno-linguistic group. As the Nage corpus reveals, such knowledge derives both from experience of the natural species and, albeit in a far lesser degree, from quite specific utilitarian and symbolic values particular animals have for people. For example, several Nage monkey metaphors reflect the status of monkeys as creatures that do great damage to crops, a component of the animal’s metaphorical image one would not expect to find in European monkey metaphors. But an important qualification is in order for, as the Nage corpus makes clear, it is doubtful whether metaphorical animals possess a single, unitary image since the same animal

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

13

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 14

can appear in multiple metaphors reflecting extremely various attributes of the animal in question and, therefore, quite diverse motivations for individual metaphors.2 With regard to the “target” domain, a further specification, corresponding to the “vehicle” subsumed by a source, is what has been called the “tenor” (Richards 1936). Thus, where the target is human beings, the “tenor” might be a person behaving in a particular way. However, given the rather abstruse appearance of “tenor” in this context, I prefer simply to speak of the referent of a metaphor, meaning its accepted meaning or usual interpretation. On the other hand, I have found “vehicle” useful to retain, in part because its general sense accords with the original Greek sense of “metaphor” as something involving a “transfer” (namely, from the source to the target domain). Normally, the target of a metaphor is more abstract than the source, which is therefore typically less abstract (Kövecses 2010, 7, who employs “life” and “journey” as examples of target and source in English metaphor). A variant view has metaphor talking about less familiar things, the target domain, in terms pertaining to something better known, the source (Lakoff and Johnson 1980, 144, 156). How far these generalizations apply to animals and humans may be debatable, not least because humans might be expected to know themselves rather better than they do non-human animals. Nevertheless, where Nage employ animal behaviours (a dog urinating) to describe human behaviours (someone acting inconstantly or ineffectually), typically the act that is more specific, discrete, and manifest, or “much more concrete and graspable” (Fernandez 1986, 8), does indeed belong to the source domain. As regards metaphors that refer to humans, it is also worth emphasizing that, belonging to the target domain, the referent is not the person to whom a term or expression is applied but some form of human action or behaviour, situation, way of doing things, and so on, which the metaphor – or a socially situated speaker by way of the metaphor – attributes to a specific human subject. Expressed otherwise, while calling someone a urinating dog employs “dog” as the source (or more specifically the vehicle), the target is not the entire person but qualities of certain people that are seen to resemble certain qualities of dogs. As this specification should indicate, metaphor involves not identical qualities equally present in both (animal) source and (human) target but, rather, an asserted similarity. And as has often been argued, rather than passively reflecting pre-existing resemblances, metaphors highlight specific similarities or connections between things that might not otherwise

14

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 15

have been noticed, a property leading some authors to speak of metaphors “creating realities” (Lakoff and Johnson 1980, 156). At the same time, regardless of how one is to understand “creativity” in metaphor (see Black 1993, 35–8), this does not mean that conventional metaphors employing animals are not thoroughly grounded in empirical properties of the creatures concerned, including properties that are available to human perception everywhere. Indeed, as the Nage corpus demonstrates, physical and behavioural features of particular animals, far more than any other factor, inform the motivation of individual metaphors. Motivation rests on specific components of the source domain that are comparable and appropriate to components of the target domain. Features shared by both domains have been called the “grounds” of a metaphor (e.g., Miller 1993, 398; Glucksberg and Keysar 1993, 407; cf. “intermediaries,” Sapir 1977, 6). But what is important for motivation is that these features are recognizable (at least in principle). Metaphors are instances of symbolic thought and action, and in animal metaphors it is of course animals that appear as symbols (or vehicles) for other things. Following a long-standing distinction, “symbols” differ from “signs’ – or at least signs that are not “natural” (Leach 1976) – insofar as signs are based in arbitrary convention. To take an obvious example, as a linguistic sign, the English word “dog” bears no necessary relation to the category denoted, which is just as adequately represented by French chien or Nage lako. In contrast, symbolic relations are in some measure always motivated, which is to say determined or delimited by some property of the symbol, which for conventional metaphors means some property of the vehicle. This is especially clear with animal metaphors, where a quality of the animal is generally accepted as similar to some attribute of the non-animal referent. Thus a person who exhibits notable cunning can be described as a “sly fox” or simply a “fox” (and her or his victims as being “foxed”) by virtue of observable habits of foxes that are comparable to certain human propensities and behaviours, whereas an attribution of cunning or slyness to a pig, horse, or chicken would normally be out of the question. For the moment, I leave out of account whether foxes really are cunning, or cunning in the same ways as are some humans – or, indeed, why attractive women are also called foxes. However, employing this same example, it should be remarked that motivations, like symbolic relations generally, are always partial and selective, so features or aspects of an animal that lend themselves to metaphorical de-

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

15

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 16

ployment tend to be highly specific. Hence someone called a fox would not be expected to have a long bushy tail or to prey on chickens, and a person would not normally be called a fox simply because he or she had red hair or followed an exclusively carnivorous diet, although these are certainly attributes of foxes. Even where resemblances seem obvious, the constituent similarity between animals and humans essential to metaphors is not always a matter of direct, empirically observable continuity. Often the identity is indirect, specifically a function of analogy wherein similarity resides in the relation of an animal to something else and the relation of a person to something else again. Thus, when Nage call people lacking houses of their own “chickens without a coop” (No. 265), they do not allude to any direct resemblance between chickens and humans or even houses and coops; rather, the metaphor reflects the formula “chicken: coop:: human: house” (where the colon means “is to,” and the double colon means “as”). Of course, one might ask: Why do Nage not say “buffalo without a corral” or “monkey without a tree”? Actually, in other metaphors they very nearly do so (see, e.g., “buffalo that wrecks its enclosure,” No. 13), or at any rate they compare the relation of humans and houses with relations between these animals and their characteristic places of habitation. This observation bears on the quite extensive occurrence of synonymity in Nage animal metaphors, where expressions employing different animals have much the same meaning (see chapter 8). But, otherwise, the use of one animal rather than another, although certainly supported by empirical or utilitarian considerations – chicken coops are kept inside or otherwise close to houses – attests to the selectivity of metaphors and, by the same token, to their partial arbitrariness. As will become apparent, Nage animal metaphors often reflect a close and accurate observation of animal forms and habits, and some Nage are notably adept at identifying relations of analogy in their metaphors. But for the moment I wish to stress that motivation in metaphor can be various. In some expressions, only a single animal could fully serve the apparent metaphorical purpose, while in others the selection appears more random. Also, whereas physical properties of particular animals are very often fundamental, in a minority of instances other values, for example an animal’s mythological significance or the specific ways Nage make practical use of an animal – thus cultural factors – are of equal or greater importance. Further qualifying the

16

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 17

generally empirical basis of animal metaphors, in yet other instances the selection of an animal appears to be largely or partly motivated by qualities of the animal’s name. These include names contributing to prosodic effects, where the animal name matches other components of a longer expression by virtue of rhyme, alliteration (repetition of consonants), or assonance (vowel correspondence). Familiar English examples include: “drunk as a skunk” and “loose as a goose” (or “loosey goosey”), exemplifying rhyme; “copycat” and “talk turkey,” revealing alliteration; and “monkey’s uncle,” demonstrating assonance. With other examples – e.g., “pig ignorant,” “loveydovey,” and “eager beaver” – prosodic effects are clearly significant yet have apparently influenced the adjective more than the animal category, which is then motivated instead by observed or attributed features of the creature itself. By contrast, with “loose as a goose” and “copycat” there is no evident basis for the particular selection other than phonological features of the animal’s name. With few exceptions, Nage animal vehicles appear not to be determined entirely by prosodic considerations, and usually some empirical basis can be found for the animal’s selection. Nevertheless, as will be seen, prosodic effects have had a substantial influence on the conventional form of a variety of metaphorical expressions. A final issue concerns the classic contrast of metaphor and simile. Like “metonymy,” “synecdoche,” and other terms, “simile” has often been treated as a variety of a more generally conceived “metaphor.” When distinguished, however, simile denotes expressions where a resemblance between source and target is made explicit (although the nature of the resemblance is usually not specified or defined), as in “like a dog pissing at the edge of a path” or, to cite two English examples, “to eat like a horse” or “fat as a pig.” By contrast, with metaphor the similarity is implicit – as when a fat, greedy, or illmannered person is simply called a “pig.” Exemplifying an intermediate possibility are expressions like “greedy fat pig” and “sly fox,” where a person is identified as an animal but specifically with respect to a single quality indicated by the adjective. The existence of such intermediate and thus ambiguous cases reveals one difficulty with the contrast, and indeed a general finding of this book is that many Nage animal metaphors can be expressed either as a metaphor (where a phrase describing an animal is simply applied to a person) or as a simile (where, by way of terms translatable as “like” or “as,” someone is characterized

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

17

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 18

as resembling an animal). To be sure, some animal metaphors appear to be expressed only as metaphors (e.g., “chickens of god” and “Nage dog,” both discussed in chapter 2) while others are more often expressed as similes and many appear to be used exclusively in this way. However, owing to this variation it is impractical to categorize Nage animals either as strict metaphors or as strict similes, and I have therefore not attempted to do so. As much to the point, Nage themselves do not distinguish “simile” and “metaphor,” categories equally included in pata péle, a Nage concept discussed in the next chapter. Apart from issues of practicality and the absence of a comparable indigenous contrast, the distinction between metaphor and simile can be understood as a matter of degree rather than of kind. Especially when one accepts that conventional references to human beings as animals do not mean they really are animals – a qualification Nage themselves recognize – and hence that metaphors express not an absolute but a partial identity, or a similarity, between humans and animals, then the contrast pertains to how explicitly this similarity (typically an island in a sea of differences) is verbally represented. By the same token, the explicit statement of resemblance definitive of simile hides a difference since someone described as “like a snake,” for example, is in most respects obviously nothing like a snake. At the same time, such a proposition is sufficiently distinguished from a statement like “a falcon is like a hawk” by the fact that falcons and hawks are both types of birds, thus items from the same domain, and moreover by the fact that the resemblance indicated is not only entirely general but is also offered non-figuratively, that is, as a “literal” truth (Ortony 1993, 346– 7; see also the virtually synonymous statement “a falcon is a ‘kind of’ hawk,” which in English, at least, ambiguously implies either close resemblance or class inclusion). Metaphor and simile, therefore, can be treated as points on a “continuum” of explicitness (Sapir 1977, 7–8). In a similar way, simile has been characterized as the “basis of metaphor” (Jones 1948, 105), and metaphor as “abbreviated simile” (Miller 1993, 356). But regardless of whether the encompassing term is taken to be simile (as the latter two authors might suggest) or metaphor (as the continuum model might suggest), the two things can be seen as intrinsically connected. Anyone taking this view is evidently in good company, for it was first proposed by Aristotle in The Poetics. Rather more recently, the position has been challenged by Boyer (1994, 53) on the grounds that metaphor (saying a person “is” a [non-human] animal) and simile (saying that a person “is like” an animal) are cognitively different. By this he means that human thought

18

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 19

processes the two propositions differently, as saying a human is a nonhuman is counterintuitive and arresting in a way that describing a human as resembling a non-human is not. However, this difference is qualified or reduced insofar as the identification of two things entailed in metaphor in a stricter sense (as when a person is simply described as a “snake” or a “hawk”) is never accepted as entirely factual or straightforwardly true. On the other hand, even where likeness is always explicitly articulated, as in the well-known English similes “eating like a horse” and “as free as a bird,” such statements must themselves be taken metaphorically. At best, they are instances of hyperbole, another variety of metaphor, where one degree of something or some quality is substituted for another. Thus while he may eat a lot and quite often, a man who eats like a horse does not really eat as much as a horse or as continuously as a horse, nor does he consume the same food. Similarly, the freedom of someone “as free as a bird” is radically different from a bird’s freedom. Grounded largely in a bird’s ability to fly (an ability humans palpably do not possess), this expression entails an analogy, whereby the bird’s character as a creature that is not earthbound is compared to the circumstances of a person relatively unbound by obligations or restrictions that are not physical but social. These points aside, the fundamental identity of metaphor and simile gains empirical support from Nage animal metaphors, in which humans are often identically linked with the same non-human animal both in explicit statements of resemblance and in expressions in which the similarity is implicit, without this affecting either the meaning or the motivation. In this way, the study of Nage animal metaphors, focusing on actual usage and variation in usage, makes a significant contribution to the study of metaphor in general. In a similar vein, it is worth stressing that many Nage animal metaphors involve metonymy as well as metaphor in the more specific sense. For example, “buffalo mounting a dog” (No. 10), referring to a higher-ranking man who marries or cohabits with a lower-ranking woman, employs the sexual act to describe something larger – the entire conjugal relationship. Similarly, “rat above” (No. 185), referring to something that distracts people’s attention, uses just one of many possible things that might prove distracting to describe any instance or situation of distraction, while in the combination of “quail” and “dove” (see Nos. 393, 402) two categories of birds that do damage to crops are employed to talk about a larger variety of birds that do so, a pattern I have previously described as “dual metonymy.” On the other hand, the use

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

19

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 20

of “buffalo” and “dog” to distinguish people of higher and lower rank involves external analogy (a concept further discussed in chapter 2) and is a straightforward instance of metaphor in the stricter sense. Methods and Methodology All metaphors discussed in this book were recorded during twenty research trips to the Nage region beginning in 1984 and extending to 2018; in total, time spent in the field was approximately three years. Initially I encountered animal metaphors incidentally in the context of general ethnography and learning the Nage language. In the 1990s, however, and partly in connection with investigations of Nage indigenous religion and spiritual cosmology, I developed a more sustained interest in Nage animal symbolism. Later in that decade I also began exploring Nage folk zoology and came to appreciate certain connections, but also important differences, between Nage symbolic representations of animals – in metaphor and elsewhere – and other ways Nage talked and thought about animals. All this contributed to my most recent book (Forth 2016). But while that work cites examples of animal metaphors, as did an earlier monograph on Nage relations with birds (Forth 2004a), it does not treat the topic systematically or comprehensively.3 This is the task of the present work. As the foregoing should suggest, I first encountered animal metaphors in a “naturalistic” way (sensu Hammersley and Atkinson 2007) as a “participant observer.” In contrast, my later initiated study of animal metaphors required far more use of directive questioning. Directive questioning admits degrees. Among the least directive varieties is free-listing, where informants are asked to name instances of a particular item, or a category. Thus, after I had recorded one or more metaphors employing a particular animal (e.g., “dog”), I asked people to list orally all metaphorical expressions they knew that included that animal’s name, an exercise aided considerably by the existence of a Nage term corresponding to English “metaphor” (see chapter 2). Given the reliance of this method on informant recall, it is reasonable to ask how complete the corpus of animal metaphors I employ in this study might be. I do not claim the corpus is absolutely complete. However, free-listing and other questioning about metaphors is likely to produce a more exhaustive return than is exclusive reliance on opportunistic observation of metaphors in use (as methodological “naturalism” would seem to require). And while

20

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 21

there are almost certainly animal metaphors I have missed, the 566 expressions recorded below are very likely to be representative of Nage animal metaphors in general. Once I had established translations of specific metaphors – like “a dog pissing at the edge of a path” – I was able to enquire more directly about their applications. And, of course, once I had become aware of given metaphors – either from observation or questioning – I became more alert to their occurrence in speech and thus in the context of particular activities and social relationships. This frequently gave rise to further questioning and discussion with Nage informants, or “commentators” as I often refer to them below. Questioning was conducted partly in the Indonesian national language (Bahasa Indonesia), a language in which I have been fluent since the mid-1970s in connection with fieldwork on the neighbouring island of Sumba (see, e.g., Forth 1981), and partly in Nage, specifically the dialect spoken in central Nage in which I have become increasingly competent since 1984. Virtually all Nage speak Indonesian, and although fluency varies with age and gender (male and younger Nage generally being more fluent), it would nowadays be difficult to engage in ethnographic conversations without some facility in the national language. Indeed, as is common among bilinguals, Nage often switch between languages in mid-speech, and when asking about named categories or expressions informants would normally first respond by offering Indonesian translations. An ethnographer obviously requires more than translations, and a large part of my effort was directed towards discovering typical Nage uses and understandings of their metaphors, including not only what they referred to but also why users thought a particular animal or animal behaviour was comparable to or provided an appropriate metaphor for something human (e.g., a corresponding human behaviour). In other words, I was searching for Nage views on motivation. Knowledge of local interpretations, including both referents and recognized motivations, was not gained only from explicit questioning or discussions I myself initiated: often, Nage spontaneously proffered explanations of why a particular animal, or an animal acting in a specific way, was appropriate to a specific metaphor, especially after they had gained a better understanding of the purposes of my study. Interpretation and motivation are of course not the same thing. Especially in semiological approaches, where symbolic entities are construed as part of a systematic code, “interpretation” commonly refers to what a symbol means

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

21

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 22

or “stands for,” or what, in regard to Nage animal metaphors, I call the referent. Referents, or interpretations in this sense, can be investigated by eliciting metalinguistic statements, comparable to informant definitions of any word or phrase – for example, “‘bachelor’ means an unmarried man,” which is comparable to “‘rat’ means a despicable person.” At the same time, even where speakers are unable to articulate a referent, these can partly be inferred from observing how metaphors are used – a normal part of any language learning. Motivation, by contrast, concerns features of a metaphor’s specific source or vehicle. In the present study, these would be features of an animal’s form or habits that suit it to the specific, typically human target – or, otherwise expressed, features of the animal that illuminate the metaphor’s meaning. In most cases I found Nage commentators themselves had definite, and moreover completely plausible, ideas about what motivated a particular metaphor. But since my investigation of animal metaphors was part of a larger study of Nage relations with non-human animals, insight into motivation was also available from concomitant investigations of Nage folk zoological knowledge and the value of specific animals in Nage life. Speakers of any language will often be able to identify the meaning of a metaphor without being able to say how or why it “works.” Think, for example, of English metaphors like “eight (or three or ten) sheets to the wind,” describing someone who is extremely drunk. In addition, speakers’ statements about motivation can appear unconvincing, ad hoc, or contrived – as sometimes can local accounts of what metaphors refer to. It goes without saying that, as with any ethnographic topic, it is necessary to discuss metaphors with a variety of people, and the need becomes all the more apparent when informant interpretations appear idiosyncratic or highly personal. For example, one man talking about the metaphor “snake in an orchard,” generally applied to an inactive person or someone who rarely leaves home (chapter 6, No. 422), interpreted this as referring specifically to a person who has been banished to a particular place and who therefore does not associate with other people. As I happened to know beforehand, this man himself had been ostracized by kin and neighbours some years previously, owing to his son having committed incest with his sister (the man’s daughter), and when I spoke to him he was living in a field hut some distance from his village. I would not consider his interpretation as inauthentic; however, it was clearly not the sole interpretation nor was it especially representative.

22

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 23

As even this example may suggest, where native speakers are able to comment on either meaning or motivation, this can contribute significantly to any ethnographic understanding of a metaphor. In fact, even if one had a perfect command of the language, a comprehensive understanding of a community’s metaphors would be impossible without recourse to informants’ statements about both their referents and motivations. Attention to actual usage is important (cf. Victor Turner’s [1967] “operational meaning”), in part because this may reveal inconsistencies with informant exegesis, but – as this last qualification reveals – it is never sufficient in and of itself, a point that gains special force in regard to metaphors reflecting particularly complex or elaborate constructions (see, e.g., No. 417, incorporating the bird named kuku raku, the previously mentioned waterhen). As should be expected, Nage are able to interpret some metaphors better than others. Also not surprisingly, I found people could more readily comment on metaphors used in prosaic speech and applied to distinctive physical or behavioural features of individual people (e.g., expressions comparable to English metaphors like “rat,” “pig,” “snake-in-the grass”) than on animal metaphors contained in proverbs or songs – in other words, in poetic idioms possessing a more diffuse quality and often pertaining to more abstract features of the human condition. Such variation, however, does not merely reflect the nature of the genre, for there is also the possibility of what Turner (1967) called “blocked exegesis,” where people may be unwilling to reveal negative aspects of symbolic usages. Apart from aspects that participants may think reflect badly on the community (Turner’s main illustration), blocked exegesis might also concern, for example, sexual meanings that people might find embarrassing and thus be unwilling to speak about openly. Although the assessment is necessarily subjective, Nage appeared generally far better able to give an account of their animal metaphors than would many English-speakers, and this was most notable when discussing motivations. Whereas Nage are usually able to give a cogent account of specific animal features that inform particular metaphors, it is unlikely that many modern English speakers would be able, for example, to say what features of weasels fit usages like “weasel word” or “to weasel out”; to provide an analysis of usages like “catbird seat” and “brass monkey”; or even to give an articulate account of why someone might be called a “pig.” The apparent difference is most readily explained by the unfamiliarity of most modern and especially

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

23

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 24

urban anglophones with animals and animal behaviour, both domestic and wild. But regardless of informant capabilities it should not be supposed that local accounts fully explain the metaphors. For one thing, they do not reveal how, in some instances, the same animal metaphor has become associated with two or more quite different local interpretations. Therefore, even where informants are able to provide substantial accounts of factors illuminating the motivation of metaphors, it is always necessary to observe metaphors in use and to draw on wider ethnographic knowledge that may support, qualify, or contradict such accounts. And even then, one cannot of course claim to have attained perfect knowledge of a metaphor. In an essay published over forty years ago, Sperber (1975, 33–4, 48, 63) argued that, unlike words in natural languages, “symbols,” under which he included conventional metaphor, do not have “meaning” and that interpretations of symbols – by which he mostly meant their “translations” or referents – are not true interpretations but are themselves symbolic statements and so only extend the symbolism. In the same context he similarly described motivations of symbols as part of the symbolism they seem to explain and, therefore, as symbolic rather than “meta-symbolic” (33). However, in contrast to other symbols (like material objects or ritual actions), which often are not locally interpreted, conventional metaphors are components of natural languages and so are in many respects similar to single words and standard idioms. Thus it is not surprising that, just as speakers of a language are usually able to provide a gloss of a word for “dog,” say, so Nage are usually able to say what “a dog pissing at the edge of a path” refers to and are, furthermore, very often able to comment on the similarity between the canine behaviour and comparable human behaviours they see as motivating the metaphor. Things are quite different, for example, with decorated sacrificial posts or acts performed at such posts – both components of major Nage ritual performances – which obviously cannot be glossed or paraphrased as can words, and whose “meanings” Nage usually find difficult or impossible to articulate. Even if interpretations of symbols of all sorts (including informant statements about motivation) were only to extend the symbolism as Sperber claims, investigating these would still form an essential part of their study, a point that has special relevance for conventional metaphor. And in fact, as I have discovered from investigating how Nage themselves understand their animal metaphors, conventional metaphors appear to differ quite substan-

24

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 25

tially from other forms of symbolism employing animals (a matter I consider in greater detail in later chapters). Organization Chapter 2 explores an indigenous Nage concept of metaphor and locates conventional metaphors in relation to anthropological uses of “metaphor” regularly encountered in the analysis of animal symbolism, especially since the mid-twentieth century. In the succeeding five chapters I then discuss in turn each of the individual expressions that compose the Nage corpus. Chapter 3 deals with domestic mammals, chapter 4 with wild mammals, chapter 5 with birds, chapter 6 with other non-mammals, and chapter 7 with insects and other invertebrates. Some readers may question an ordering of a non-Western society’s animal metaphors according to phylogenetic categories employed in international (or scientific) zoology. I do so for three reasons. First, Nage themselves possess folk-taxa, specifically “life forms” (sensu Berlin 1992), that generally correspond to “mammal,” “bird,” “snake,” and “fish” (Forth 2016) and thus reasonably approximate the “classes” (e.g., Mammalia, Aves) and other taxa of biological systematics. Second, the procedure replicates that followed in my 2016 book and so facilitates coordination with this earlier work. And third, ordering animal metaphors with reference to an internationally recognized scheme of animal taxa best facilitates cross-cultural comparison. In all chapters, single animals are identified with an English name (e.g., “dog”), the Nage name, and a Latinate taxon (or “scientific name”). Under each animal name, individual metaphors are then arranged alphabetically in accordance with their English translations. The metaphors are first given in English translation, followed by the original Nage expression, and then by a brief summary of the recognized referent or referents. After this I include a commentary, expanding on the translation and discussing how the metaphor is employed, details of its motivation, and further matters that illuminate the Nage usage. In treating issues of translation, I sometimes refer to languages closely related to Nage, especially other languages in the “Ngadha-Lio” group (Wurm and Hattori 1981), such as Endenese and Lio (spoken to the east of Nage) and Ngadha (spoken immediately to the west). Also mentioned in the commentaries are comparisons with conventional metaphors found in

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

25

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 26

English, Indonesian, and other languages, including other eastern Indonesian languages. As explained, discussion of motivation draws in large part from informant exegesis, and where my analysis, based on observation of usage, more general ethnography pertaining to Nage practice and knowledge of particular animals, or information drawn from international zoology replaces, augments, or qualifies local exegesis, this is made clear. As noted, animal metaphor is found not only in expressions referring to people but also in the names of human body parts, plants, artefacts, other animals, and so on. Where these occur, such expressions are listed at the end of individual animal entries (e.g., “dog,” “rat,” “crow,” “viper”), thus after the majority of metaphors that refer to human actions, characters, and the like (and thus qualifying the otherwise alphabetical ordering of entries). In each case, I begin with metaphorical animal names (e.g., “buffalo cricket” denoting a large kind of cricket), thereafter listing plant names and then names of artefacts and objects. Including informant exegeses, commentaries are provided in the same way as for other metaphorical usages, and where possible I provide scientific (Latinate) identifications for the plant or animal referents. To facilitate cross-referencing, metaphors are numbered consecutively throughout chapters 3 to 7. Drawing on discussion of individual usages in the preceding five chapters, chapter 8 explores general features of Nage animal metaphors, including the extent to which their motivation is attributable to observation and empirical knowledge of physical features and behaviours of given species, as opposed to human uses served by an animal or an animal’s symbolic value in myth, cosmology, and so on, or lexical features of animal names. This discussion produces an important result for it reveals how the metaphorical use of animal categories in fact has little connection with other “symbolic” uses of the same categories and also less than might be expected with the animals’ utilitarian value. Another comparative issue explored in chapter 8 concerns variation in the metaphorical use made of different animal life forms (mammals, birds, and so on). As will be seen, in regard to the number of metaphors employing each animal category – mostly folk-generics like “cat,” “crocodile,” “crow,” and “cockroach” – Nage make more use of mammals than they do of any other kind of animal, even though the number of individual bird and invertebrate categories employed metaphorically is considerably larger. They also make far more use of domestic than of wild mammals. And in these respects, Nage use of animals as metaphors corresponds in some interesting

26

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 27

ways with what is found in English usage – a finding that, as I show, ultimately contributes to understanding the prominence of animals in general as vehicles of conventional metaphor. The final chapter, chapter 9, then turns to questions of what Nage metaphors reveal about their relations with non-human animals; how animal metaphors may reflect Nage ideas about and expectations of fellow humans; and, in a closely related vein, how the metaphors express social values in regard to varieties of human character and behaviour, and, thus, the place of animal metaphor in social intercourse and social relationships. Finally, this chapter deals with matters of comparative ontology by addressing the question of whether or how far Nage animal metaphors provide evidence for a distinct way of thinking about continuities and discontinuities between humans and non-human animals, and, particularly, how far Nage might, in this respect, depart from the ontological “naturalism” some anthropologists have proposed as the definitive feature of Western thought.

I N T R O D U C T O R Y M AT T E R S

27

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 28

2 Metaphors and “Metaphor” in Human-Animal Relations

For some anthropologists “metaphor” has become almost a dirty word. In particular, participants in the previously mentioned “ontological turn,” including proponents of a “neo-animism” (a coinage of Graham Harvey 2006), regard statements by members of non-Western societies identifying humans and non-human entities not as metaphor but as literal beliefs, and perhaps even experiences, definitive of a distinct ontology, a way not only of thinking but of “being.” Exemplifying this position is Ingold’s criticism of analyses of hunter-gatherer peoples who speak of their relation with their environment in terms of a relationship between “parent” (the environment) and “child” (the people). Whereas others (e.g., Bird-David 1999) have interpreted such expressions as metaphors that use social relations to “make sense of,” conceptualize, model, or construct human experience of nature (a position recently defended by Descola 2013, 250–1), Ingold asserts that they are no such thing. Rather, reference to the forest, for example, as a bountiful parent reveals not a metaphor but an “actuality,” “a moment in the unfolding of relations between humans and non-human agencies and entities in the environment” (Ingold 2011, 45). And in verbally speaking of their environment as “parents” and “beg[ging] the forest to provide food as would a human parent,” Ingold further claims, food-collectors are simply giving voice to an identity between human relations with (and within) nature and relations within (or with) society, and are, by the same token, expressing their “real unity” (50, emphasis added) – a formulation facilitating Ingold’s attempt to dissolve the dualism of “nature” and “society” (or “culture”).

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 29

In another place, Ingold (2011, 50) suggests that, in these instances, “the metaphor ‘forest is as [sic] parent’ could just as well be expressed as ‘parent is as [sic] forest,’” adding that the “force of the metaphor is to reveal the underlying ontological equivalence of human and non-human components of the environment as agencies of nurturance.” At least as far as conventional metaphor goes, this is questionable for metaphors are characteristically asymmetrical – so that describing a person as an animal does not mean the animal can equally be called a “person” or that it is ever conceptualized as such. Although Ingold’s claim would suggest that he does subscribe to some application of “metaphor” (129, 283, 284, 285, 361), his otherwise censorious approach to anthropological employment of the concept refers specifically or primarily to hunter-gatherers and, on that ground alone, might be considered irrelevant, or less relevant, to cultivators like the Nage (even though they hunt as well). On the other hand, Ingold’s approach generally suggests a more inclusive relevance (see, e.g., his critique of Gudeman’s [1986] interpretation of Western and non-Western “models of livelihood” [Ingold 2011, 44–5], where “model” appears largely equivalent to “metaphor”) and even a view that, in their allegedly non-metaphoric way of thinking, hunter-gatherers have got things right (see, e.g., Ingold 2011, 76; also Ingold 2016, 308). To generalize on this kind of ontological pluralism (Holbraad and Pedersen 2017, 156), metaphor is treated by proponents as an artefact of what has been called “naturalism” (sensu Descola 2013), a mode of thinking about and experiencing the world represented as exclusively characteristic of Western societies and principally contrasted to a revamped notion of “animism.” Especially as I am not arguing that Nage animal metaphors, or metaphors of any sort, demarcate or typify an entire cosmology or pervasive ontology, I am not entirely unsympathetic to Ingold’s argument. I would also question the social determinism or constructivism against which he speaks and would do so, moreover, not just with reference to hunter-gatherer cosmology but also in respect to human thought and behaviour in general. However, since my topic is conventional metaphor, standard forms of verbal expression, it is unclear how far we are talking about the same thing. In several respects, Ingold’s attack appears to be directed primarily at “metaphor” as employed as an analytic, interpretative, or observer’s category – or what has sometimes been called “unconscious” metaphor (Sandor 1986, 112) or “literal metaphors” (West 2007, 63, 83, citing Cochetti 1995) and which, as I explain below, can

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

29

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 30

also be distinguished as “Jakobsonian” metaphor. On the other hand, in questioning whether a hunter-gatherer practice of addressing a forest as a parent can be considered “metaphorical,” Ingold (2011, 44) asserts that “this is evidently not an interpretation that the people would make themselves” – as if to suggest that something can be called metaphor only insofar as its users recognize it as such. Interestingly, another ontological pluralist who takes exception to anthropological deployments of metaphor, Viveiros de Castro (2004, 13–16), makes virtually the same assertion when, in reference to Urban’s (1996) interpretation of indigenous South American ideas concerning jaguars and tapirs as “metaphoric,” he states that he (Viveiros de Castro) “could hazard a guess” that the people themselves “probably do not share this interpretation” (Viveiros de Castro 2004, 14). One might enquire why neither of these authors, or the writers they cite, apparently ever asked the people themselves. But in any case, and despite Ingold’s use of “evidently,” no specific evidence is provided for either of these claims. The more important point, however – and one I need to stress – is that, in regard to their conventional animal metaphors, Nage do indeed advance such interpretations. That is, when they describe somebody as a “dog,” or “like a dog,” they are explicitly not saying that the person really is a dog. In other words, they describe such verbally articulated relations between a human and a non-human animal as expressly metaphorical. And they are able to do so by invoking a named concept corresponding to European “metaphor.” “Metaphor” in Nage All of the usages I discuss in this book are instances of the Nage category pata péle, a term people equate with Indonesian ibarat, “simile, metaphor,” and which Nage with a better knowledge of the national language recognize as synonymous with Dutch-derived metafora (“metaphor”). Sometimes Nage describe their conventional metaphors as bholo ‘ana, “just talk, only (a way of) speaking,” an evaluation signalling recognition of the fact that a person described as an animal, say, is ultimately not an animal (ana wa) but a human being (kita ata). However, bholo ‘ana applies not only to speech recognized as figurative but equally to non-figurative statements that are not backed by evidence or that pertain to future actions that have yet to be carried out. Hence the more exact designation of statements that are distinguishably metaphorical remains pata péle.

30

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 31

Pata péle comprises the nominal term pata, modified by péle (adjectives always follow nouns in Nage). In contrast to words referring to language or speech in general (e.g., punu, “to speak, state”; sa punu, “way of talking, language”; and ‘ana, dialectal rana, “to state, tell, relate”), pata denotes a specific statement, either one that has already been made or one that will be made. Tau pata (tau, “to do, make”) thus means “to create, compose” lyrics or a speech or, less formally “to make a statement.” The term further refers to a form of words in regular use – for example, an expression regularly employed in formal ritual language or standard phrases used in orations. Apart from these uses, other recorded senses of pata include “(spoken) decision, agreement, or understanding”; a “quotation (a record of what someone has said),” an express “opinion” (contrasting to ola he, a thought yet to be openly expressed) or “position (on a matter)”; “information,” “report” or “(piece of) news” (as in edi pata, “to bring news, convey information,” and pata mona dhu ena, “word has not reached there”), and a “matter, topic of conversation.” As a reference to fixed expressions, pata is a component of several terms mostly specifying contexts in which the former are typically employed. These include: pata teke, lyrics of chants that accompany circle-dancing (teke); pata joki, planting songs; pata kasi, songs of mourning; and pata dhéro, songs performed while circle-dancing during annual pugilistic competitions named etu (Forth 1998). Another compound of pata denoting lyrics is pata néke, or, more completely, pata péle néke (also péle néke), which refers not to the context of a performance but to content. Meaning “to tease, deride, criticize (often in a cynical way),” néke as a modifier of pata describes lyrics of a variety of songs performed while planting and circle-dancing that are sung, in turn, by groups of men and women and that tease or deride members of the opposite sex. (The reciprocal character of these exchanges is emphasized in the related term papa néke, where papa expresses reciprocal action.) Such teasing or derision – which English term is the better translation varies with context – is very often of a sexual nature, and the human traits to which the phrases refer are typically oblique. As this should suggest, the language of pata néke, as of other performances classified as pata (planting songs, songs of mourning), is characteristically metaphorical, and a great many component phrases comprise animal metaphors. It therefore follows that statements (pata) contained in planting songs (pata joki), for example, equally comprise instances of pata péle, or metaphor. At the same time, Nage employ many more animal metaphors in everyday speech than they do in song.

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

31

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 32

As the qualifier of pata and therefore as a term specifying metaphorical language, péle has several related meanings, all involving the idea of separation and, more specifically, of placing a seal or partition between things. Among these are “to close or shut off, enclose” and “to keep something away (from something else),” as in péle bhada, “to shut a buffalo in” a corral or other confined area, and péle manu “to place a chicken inside a coop or cage” or, alternatively, “to keep chickens out” (of a garden, for example). Péle ae can mean “to close off or hold back a flow of water (ae),” as is done when constructing a dam or weir across a stream or river, while pe ngawu awu (where pe is a synonymous abbreviation of péle) describes a wooden or bamboo retainer used to hold earth in place at the lower edge of a sloping garden plot in order to prevent slippage or erosion. Similarly, péle zala (or pe zala) means “to block off ” a path or road (zala), usually by erecting a bamboo barricade. In other cases in which the sense of sealing or shutting off is equally present, péle has the additional sense of “protecting” something – as in péle (ko) angi, “to shut out wind,” “protect from the wind,” a function served by walls or vertical screens in a house or hut, or any sort of “windbreak.” More figuratively, the last phrase can mean to keep out or protect a place from various sorts of negative forces, either human or spiritual, while in much the same way péle ngai (ngai is “breath”) refers to thwarting another person’s efforts. In a more tangible vein, comparable usages include péle (ae) uza, “to keep out rain,” describing the function of dried palm boughs placed atop maize storage frames or a large banana leaf held above the head, and péle leza, “to keep out the sun,” describing a parasol or modern sunglasses. In other contexts – and often in the abbreviated form pe – péle refers more specifically to covering up or screening off in order to hide or conceal something. One example is pe ngia, “to hide the face,” an expression combined in parallelistic speech with nidi pasu, “to conceal the cheeks,” to form a standard expression referring to a quantity of goods, additional to the bridewealth, paid to a woman’s group in order to facilitate an illicit or undesirable marriage (e.g., where the relation between the two spouses is considered too close). The phrases imply that the payment serves as a screen between the two sides to a marriage – one might even say it creates the sides or creates a division, especially where a marriage might be conceived as occurring within a single group. Conceived as an act of separation (péle or pe), the payment can alternatively be interpreted as putting a distance between the spouses as

32

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 33

well as concealing the problematic aspects of their relationship. And a notion of protection is equally present insofar as less than correct marriages, like other improper acts or relationships that are not ritually neutralized, can result in illness, affliction, or other misfortune for the parties concerned. As should be clear from the foregoing, as the term for “metaphor,” pata péle can be understood as referring to a statement that separates, closes off, hides, or protects one thing from another – or, indeed, incorporates two or more of these meanings at the same time. As to what may be separated from what, an immediate inference is that this is an implicit, non-metaphorical statement reflecting the speaker’s intention and the referent (or interpretation) of the metaphor. And, in fact, Nage with whom I discussed this question agreed. As one man put it, what is péle (screened off, shut out, covered, or concealed) by metaphorical language is the speaker’s “true statement” (expressed in Indonesian as kata sebenarnya, “true or proper words”) or what cannot, or should not, “be expressed directly” (di omong langsung). Thus, to use the informant’s own example, instead of “directly” describing someone as possessing an “ugly, bad, or wicked character” (ngai zede ta’a ‘é’e) one might describe the person as being or behaving like a “dog (and) pig” (lako wawi, No. 86). If these statements have a familiar ring, this is probably because “direct” (Indonesian langsung) is often encountered as a synonym of “literal” or “non-figurative” in English writing on metaphor (e.g., Sandor 1986). Like the last example, the majority of animal metaphors Nage apply to people are negative or critical in tone, a fact that bears on their place in social intercourse and relationships (see chapter 9). Especially where metaphors convey a less than positive evaluation, metaphor in the Nage view renders socially more acceptable what otherwise would be less acceptable by “screening off ” or “covering” the speaker’s “true meaning” (as in the informant’s interpretation reported above). But this “screen” is further construed as “protecting” and “preserving” (two further senses of péle) the feelings of people referred to or addressed and, therefore, the relationship between speakers and human referents – another assessment of animal metaphors Nage themselves recognize. Both interpretations might initially appear paradoxical because the “true meaning” of metaphors is normally known both to the speaker and to the person spoken about or addressed – an open secret, one might say. Yet it hardly needs mentioning that, among humans generally (and perhaps more so among Indonesians than among Westerners), the way something is said can be more important than what is expressed, and speaking of something openly

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

33

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 34

can have quite different consequences from conveying a message by more covert, or “covered,” means. Of course, whether expressing a value pertaining to indirectness or focusing more specifically on protecting human sensibilities, local interpretations of pata péle are less applicable where animal metaphors refer to positively valued human traits. They also have no relevance for metaphors that serve as the sole names of plants, artefacts, or other animals. Indeed, regardless of their referents, Nage metaphors, like metaphor anywhere, cannot simply be a matter of employing a figurative expression where a direct or literal statement could have been used instead. For literal equivalents are not always available, and Nage use animal metaphors in conveying a variety of quite specific ideas, mostly about humans and human behaviour and character that cannot be so fully conveyed, or communicated so subtly or artfully, by other means. Ideas of separating, shutting off, sheltering, and concealing that are central to the Nage concept are also discernible in terms for “metaphor” in other eastern Indonesian languages. This holds not only for Ngadha and Lio, eponymous languages of the Ngadha-Lio group spoken, respectively, to the west and east of Nage and which contain terms virtually identical to Nage péle and pata péle,1 but also for Sikkanese, a member of the separate FloresLembata group of languages spoken in the far eastern part of Flores. Pareira and Lewis (1998) list Sikkanese patang-péleng or péleng-patang, expressions obviously comparable to Nage (or Ngadha-Lio) pata péle, as “proverb” (Indonesian peribahasa). They also gloss péle as “to go against” (Indonesian menyongsong; as in “to sail against the wind’), thereby suggesting the idea of something acting as a counterforce, like a dam or barricade. Immediately recalling two Nage usages described above, a similarly close correspondence is found in Kambera, spoken in the eastern part of the neighbouring island of Sumba, where kajangu, a word whose primary meaning is something used to cover and protect oneself from rain or sun – a large banana leaf or palm bough, for example – additionally refers to the pervasively metaphoric lexicon of Sumbanese ritual language, which, as I note in an earlier work, serves to “shelter or disguise that to which [speakers] obliquely refer” (Forth 1981, 19). In the same vein, Onvlee (1984, 136) glosses tamu kajangu, a name (tamu) used in place of the real name of a person of high rank, with Dutch beschuttingsnaam, which incorporates beschutten, “to shelter, screen” (from schut, “screen, fence, partition”), and is therefore semantically identical to German

34

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 35

Deckname (literally “cover name”), meaning “alias.” Of course, an alias or alternative name is not quite the same thing as a metaphor. Yet insofar as both involve substituting one term or phrase with another, it is not without interest that terms with the same meaning in Germanic languages should involve the same metaphor – of covering, shutting off, or sheltering something – as do terms for “metaphor” in languages of eastern Indonesia. In a way also comparable to eastern Indonesian representations of metaphor, the Ilongot people of the Philippines, speakers of another MalayoPolynesian language, characterize the metaphoric speech of adult men’s oratory as “crooked” speech, contrasting to the “straight” speech of ordinary discourse (Rosaldo 1980, 194, 199, 202). Here, too, metaphor is distinguished from literal language by “indirection” (198–9), a property obviously shared by Nage pata péle, or “speech that separates, covers, or hides.” And equally noteworthy is Rosaldo’s interpretation of Ilongot oratory as using metaphors to “hide … deeper meanings” (202). Much further afield, another view of metaphor comparable to that suggested by the Nage term is discernible among the Amerindian Cuna of Panama. Specifically, the Cuna idea of metaphor finds expression in forms of purpa (“soul, shadow”), including purpale, a word partly meaning “covertly, invisibly, incorporeally,” while purpar sunmakke, “to speak metaphorically,” more generally refers to “speaking in euphemisms or other indirect speech forms” (Howe 1977, 137). As Howe goes on to note, both metaphor and euphemism “share the quality of being hidden, at one remove.” He further suggests that, as a reference to metaphors, the best gloss of purpale may be “the hidden essence of things” (137), and later he speaks of “the secret or hidden quality of metaphor” (163). If this is correct, then the Cuna word would seem to refer to the meaning of a metaphor (the interpretation or referent), whereas Nage péle, understood as something that separates, closes off, or hides, applies more to the vehicle. Nevertheless, as Howe makes clear, for Cuna the process of metaphor involves an act of covering or concealing (and, by way of interpretation, eventually uncovering or revealing) just as it does for Nage. How widespread representations similar to the Nage concept might be either in the Malayo-Polynesian-speaking world or within a broader range of languages and societies, I am unable to say. But in a comparative frame, equally important is the contrast between the Nage (and Sumbanese, Ilongot, and Cuna) view of metaphor and European “metaphor,” at least if one is to judge from the meaning of Greek metapheiren, as a “transfer” or “carrying over” –

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

35

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 36

as in the transferring of an idea pertaining to an animal to a human subject. Clearly, metaphor as “transfer” involves the image of connecting things. By contrast, metaphor as expressed in pata péle conveys quite the opposite meaning, of something that disconnects – or forms a barrier rather than a bridge. But this does not mean that Nage do not also recognize metaphors as ways of effectively articulating thoughts and feelings, anymore than it means that anglophones, for example, do not appreciate the indirectness and opacity of metaphor – the fact that rather than describing humans directly and explicitly in strictly human terms, one speaks instead of animals, plants, or something else not human. Indeed, the European and Nage concepts both turn on division and difference: in the first case between two domains (source and target) and in the second between something that separates, covers, or conceals (the metaphorical statement) and something that is separated and covered (the implicit referent). Of course, in the Nage conception this referent is only partly “covered” since, for those who know the metaphor, the meaning is transparent. And in a parallel way, the “transfer” a metaphor effects between two domains is less than complete for, in the process, the message received is always partly transformed – even though the meaning extracted from the source necessarily retains some resemblance to the meaning assumed in the target domain. (Think, for example, of what changes and remains the same when we speak of the “flow” of a river and the “flow” of speech.) However, one should not make too much of the words in which concepts of “metaphor” are expressed, for both European “metaphor” (or Latin metaphora, from Greek metapheiren) and Nage pata péle must themselves be understood as figurative usages – if not as metaphors in the stricter sense, then as metonymies in which different parts refer to the same whole. In so doing, moreover, they focus on different modalities of the same complex phenomenon, and, to that extent, analyzing them comparatively illuminates two contrary yet ultimately complementary properties of a single thing.2 “Metaphor” and Conventional Metaphor As confirmed by their own understanding, it should be quite clear that Nage pata péle specifically denotes conventional metaphors: standard verbal expressions that describe something human, say, by talking about something nonhuman. For a considerable time, however, anthropologists have additionally

36

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 37

employed “metaphor” as an analytical category in the investigations of relations, including relations between humans and animals, which are not expressed, or are not expressed solely or primarily, in conventional metaphors. Deriving from the work of Jakobson, this other use of “metaphor” specifies one of two major forms of symbolic or semiotic relations (the other, of course, being identified with metonymy). In regard to relations that are not semantic or even linguistic, a well-known application of this contrast is Jakobson’s interpretation, later taken up by Leach (1976), of Frazer’s homeopathic and contagious magic – acts that frequently lack any verbal component – as founded on metaphor and metonymy, respectively (Jakobson and Halle 1956, 95). Understood in this way, “metaphor” became a mainstay of structuralism, and in anthropology came to be employed in the interpretation of relations discernible not only in ritual and myth but also, for example, in forms of social organization, including systems of kinship and marriage (e.g., Wagner 1986). In fact, so popular has been this extended acceptation of metaphor that it has survived into the twenty-first century, thus well past the heyday of structuralism and even poststructuralism. Especially in regard to the distinction with conventional metaphor, it is worth stressing that, while “metaphor” in the Jakobsonian sense is sometimes identifiable in what members of a cultural community commonly say (e.g., when members of a a turtle clan describe themselves as turtles), such verbal expression is neither exclusive nor necessary. That is, a relation between things thus identifiable as “metaphor” might be discerned as an aspect of those things of which culture participants are, or quite likely will be, unaware, so that their determination will be mainly or entirely the product of an extraneous interpretation. Among the best known instances of such anthropological deployment of “metaphor,” and one with special relevance for human relations with animals and other living things, is Lévi-Strauss’s (1963) interpretation of totemism as involving a relation of metaphor connecting a series of human groups comprising a single social system and a series of natural species. For Lévi-Strauss, it will be recalled, this relation defines the fundamental structure of totemic systems, and any substantial connections participants posit between themselves and their totem species – for example, an identification of the species as ancestors or as sharing common descent with humans – are secondary, contingent, and inessential. In the same way, similarities of behaviour or physical form posited between a totem animal and human members of a totemic group are not primary but derivative.

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

37

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 38

Obviously, “metaphor” as applied to conventional Nage expressions employing animals and “metaphor” as applied to totemism both entail regularly expressed conceptual connections between animals and humans. This would suggest a fundamental resemblance, but in other respects the two instances of “metaphor” are quite different. A difference already touched on lies in the fact that metaphors like “a dog pissing at the edge of a path” are recognized by Nage themselves as figurative usages, that is, as not entailing any idea that a person so described really is a dog or has temporarily become a dog – nor, indeed, that the human referent is actually urinating. By contrast, the structural relation of totemism as articulated by Lévi-Strauss is metaphoric specifically for the analyst, even though the component associations between human groups and animals are phenomena with which members will naturally be familiar. In addition, members of a “dog clan,” for example, may claim a substantial connection with canines. In what sense humans actually identify with their totemic species is a topic of considerable dispute in anthropology (compare, e.g., Lévi-Strauss’s view with that of ontological pluralists like Descola 2013). But it is fair to say that members of totemic groups would not usually regard their identification with a totem animal as “merely a way of speaking” (Nage bholo ‘ana) – nor, as this would imply, as something that could be more exactly verbalized in a quite different way. (Even though it would hardly matter for an understanding of Nage conventional metaphors, it is also worth mentioning that, with one possible exception, what can be called “totems” among Nage comprise not animals but plants [Forth 2009a; Forth 2016, 260].) Focusing on the Nage corpus, conventional metaphors and “metaphor” as employed in structuralist analysis can be seen to differ in at least four other respects. First, Nage recognition of the figurative character of conventional metaphors is consistent with their alternative expression, in many cases, either as similes (“like a dog …”) or as metaphors in the stricter sense. Second, whereas in totemism an animal, or sometimes two or more animals, is exclusively related to a single group or category of people, with conventional animal metaphors all animals are, with relatively few exceptions (such as when an expression can only be applied either to women or men), prospectively identified with anyone. Thus, in principle, any Nage can be described, for example, as “a urinating dog,” “a chicken with feathered legs,” or a “dolphin down by the coast.” Third, and following from the foregoing, the connection between humans and animals in totemism is permanent, so

38

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 39

that a member of a dog clan, say, is always a dog. By contrast, someone whose work is inconstant, and who is therefore characterized as “a dog pissing at the edge of a path,” may only very occasionally behave in this way and, furthermore, only in the estimation of one or more specific others – based, perhaps, on how the person’s behaviour affects them. To take another example, “bees inside a cavity” (No. 512) describes several people speaking simultaneously or in such a way that individual voices cannot be distinguished and whose conversation is likely to bother other people. But the individuals thus characterized do not of course always converse in this way. In other words, Nage metaphors refer largely to individuals or collections of individuals rather than to whole categories of people, and they are more often used situationally rather than categorically as references to constant human characters. (These specifications, I suspect, probably apply to animal metaphors in most languages.) A fourth distinction is also related to the first two. As will become clear from chapter 8, many animal metaphors in the Nage corpus are synonymous with others or nearly so. That is, the same or very similar human attributes are described with metaphors employing quite different animals. With totemism, by contrast, the association of a social group or category is, again, fixed by tradition, and while it is possible for groups to possess more than one totem simultaneously, there can be no substitution of one animal for another. Here, one may be reminded of Sperber’s (1975) point that, by contrast to components of natural language (words, phrases), symbols cannot be “translated” by other symbols. However, in this respect synonymous conventional metaphors, as standard expressions with well-defined meanings, tend to resemble non-figurative linguistic usages and, to that extent, differ from other forms of symbolism. In exploring relations between humans and other living things, and using the concept in an extended and at least partly Jakobsonian sense, anthropologists have of course applied metaphor to far more than totemism. A noteworthy example from eastern Indonesia is Fox’s (1971) article “Sister’s Child as Plant,” in which a pervasive analogy with plant growth and cultivation is shown to govern Rotinese conceptions of kinship. But many other instances concern not plants but animals, as, for example, Tambiah’s (1969) nearly contemporaneous 1969 article in which he distinguishes “metaphorical” and “metonymical” forms of human-animal relations among the non-totemic Thai. And another instance is Valeri’s (2000) more recent discussion of taboo

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

39

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 40

among the eastern Indonesian Huaulu, in which he distinguishes human relations with dogs and chickens, respectively, in the same way. Although employing “metaphor” almost entirely as a reference to figurative language, worthy of special attention in connection with the expressive deployment of animal categories is Evans-Pritchard’s work on the Nuer, not least because it represents a landmark development in the anthropological study of relations between humans and animals that is both earlier and quite distinct from Lévi-Straussian structuralist approaches. A well-known example is Evans-Pritchard’s (1956, 88) interpretation of the Nuer statement “twins are birds,” which he identifies as a “belief ” (80) although later as a “symbol” – and, ultimately, a symbol of the special relation of twins to god (131–2). This double characterization may seem inconsistent insofar as “beliefs” and “symbols” are usually contrasted as propositions held to be literally true and not literally true. Similarly ambiguous is Evans-Pritchard’s use of “metaphor,” for example when he asserts that the Nuer statement that twins and birds are kin “may be regarded as metaphorical” but not the relationship between twins and birds per se. Or when he speaks of an “implicit metaphor which runs throughout Nuer religion of light and dark, associated with sky and earth” (97, emphasis added) while otherwise reserving “metaphor” for figurative language, which is to say, conventional metaphor. Nevertheless, in its symbolic aspect, EvansPritchard further analyzes the Nuer equation of twins and birds as one based in an analogy, whereby twins are considered related to god in a way similar to birds – thus much in the same way as Crocker (1977a) interpreted the “metaphor” he (Crocker) detected in the Bororo identification of men and parrots. And also recalling the Bororo relation, the Nuer identification of twins and birds is not only verbalized but finds further expression in ritual, for example when a dead infant twin is not buried like other infants but instead is placed in the fork of a tree (Evans Pritchard 1956, 129–30). Insofar as Nuer ideas about twins and birds might therefore be construed as entailing metaphor (or, alternatively, “metonymy” [see Turner 1991]), then so might the relation between Nuer and cattle or, more specifically, Nuer men and oxen (Evans-Pritchard 1940; Evans-Pritchard 1956). In this case too, “metaphor” – a word that appears nowhere in Evans-Pritchard’s 1940 monograph – is not a usage of the ethnographer himself. However, subsequent commentators have interpreted the relation as metaphoric (e.g., Crocker 1977b, 61–2; Hutchinson 1996, 54; Willis 1974, 14–15).3 And, in regard to EvansPritchard’s characterization of the Nuer “social idiom” as a “bovine idiom,”

40

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 41

one must ask what this could mean other than a use of cattle as a metaphor or, more exactly, a pervasive conceptual metaphor. Nevertheless, an explicit use of “metaphor” in a non-linguistic or non-semantic sense by late twentieth-century anthropologists interpreting conceptual relations between humans and animals is more directly traceable to European structuralism, including, of course, Jakobson’s concept of metaphor. Besides Tambiah’s analysis of animals in Thai life and Crocker’s reanalysis of the Bororo identification of men and macaws, noteworthy instances include Geertz’s (1973) interpretation of Balinese fighting-cocks as metaphors of Balinese men and manhood, and Ohnuki-Tierney’s (1987) detailed investigation of the significance of the monkey in Japanese society. In addition, a particular interpretation of metaphor (or “lived metaphors”) has been central to phenomenological approaches in anthropology (Jackson 1996), while more recently Hurn (2012) has employed “metaphor” in a comparative discussion of human-animal relations in various cultural settings, including her own investigations of attitudes towards foxes and (human) “incomers” in rural Wales. Despite their various applications of a largely structuralist notion of metaphor, however, none of the foregoing authors has given much attention to conventional animal metaphors. In fact, few anthropologists have referred to “conventional metaphor” at all, though Roger Keesing (1985) has used the term to denote something more like conceptual metaphor (specifically as an alternative interpretation of what other anthropologists have understood as “beliefs” in existent entities), and Michelle Rosaldo (1980, 194) speaks of “rice” and “honey” as “conventional ways of talking about a wife” among the Ilongot. Although similarly not specifying them as such, in the present context a somewhat more important exception is Geertz’s brief discussion of conventional Balinese metaphors incorporating the cock as a vehicle and referring, for example, to a hero, dandy, lady killer, and to “a pompous man whose behavior presumes above his station” (described as a “tailless cock”). But these several verbal usages appear quite incidental to what the author calls the “deep psychological identification of Balinese men with their [fighting] cocks” (Geertz 1973, 417), which he demonstrates mostly with reference to a variety of practices, behaviours, and attitudes. Also, immediately after mentioning conventional cock metaphors, Geertz tellingly suggests, apparently underscoring his use of metaphor in a broader, analytical sense, that this identification (or, more specifically, the “intimacy of men with their cocks”) is “more than metaphorical” (415).

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

41

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 42

To the extent that Nuer identification of men and cattle might similarly be construed as metaphoric, it should be noted how, in this case too, Nuer employ conventional cattle metaphors – for example, designating leading men as “bulls,” described by Evans-Pritchard (1956, 254) as “a common metaphor of speech” – as well as metaphors involving other animals (notably ants [Evans-Pritchard 1956, 12]). On the other hand, rather than speaking of people as cattle, more often, it seems, Nuer describe cattle as people (as when a cow is called a man’s “mother”), and, as with the Balinese and their fighting-cocks, the pervasive relationship that obtains between men and cattle obviously entails far more than employing the animals as vehicles of figurative language. How Bororo men and macaws might figure in these comparisons is unclear since, quite remarkably after all the attention that has been given to this relationship, Crocker (1977a, 189) states that he never heard a Bororo spontaneously assert the proposition “we are red macaws.” Nevertheless, the proposition evidently amounts to more than a single conventional metaphor for, as mentioned earlier, it too finds expression in a variety of nonverbal media. The Question of Non-figurative “Metaphor” in Nage Human-Animal Relations Unlike totemism, where people expressly identify themselves with a particular animal (and possibly also unlike the Bororo in regard to macaws), only rarely do Nage employ conventional animal metaphors self-referentially, in the first person singular or plural. More often, Nage metaphors are expressed in the third person – “he is a dolphin”; “she is like a buffalo thinking of its offspring” – and even more frequently in the second person, in direct address to an individual or collection of individuals. Connected with this, most Nage animal metaphors convey a negative evaluation, being used to criticize a particular behaviour, to make fun of someone (including someone’s appearance), or to express annoyance or exasperation at the way people are conducting themselves. A number of Nage animal metaphors, however, diverge from these generalizations, partly because all can be used in the first person (“I am/we are X”) and partly because none is normally expressed as a simile. At least one of the exceptional usages, moreover, bears especially close comparison with the Bororo declaration (if such it is) that their men are red macaws, at least

42

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 43

as Crocker construes this. The Nage expression is “we are god’s chickens” (kita ana manu déwa, No. 266), a statement heard in songs of mourning (pata kasi) where it is supplemented by lyrics elaborating on this relationship, and which applies to all Nage and possibly to human beings in general. Crocker, it may be recalled, explains Bororo men’s identification with macaws as resting on an analogy involving a comparison between the position of men in relation to women in this matrilineal society and the situation of pet macaws, creatures owned almost entirely by women and housed in that part of Bororo settlements where women exercise a certain dominance. Particularly in his grounding of the representation in social experience, it should be pointed out that Crocker does not view the Bororo man-macaw connection as entailing “metaphor” in the sense Lévi-Strauss applied the concept to totemism – as a function of an entire system conjoining a series of natural kinds with a series of human categories or groups. Nor, as he demonstrates, does the identification derive from mystical ideas connecting humans, macaws, and spiritual entities, or other relations interpretable as metonymic or synecdochal (although certain Bororo attitudes and usages, he argues, do indeed reflect synecdoche or metonymy [Crocker 1977a, 168]). Crocker (1977b, 61) does, however, conclude that the Bororo idea that “men are red macaws” is a metaphor, specifically, a “complex internal metaphor” based in a substantial similarity of two analogous relationships involving not just men and birds but men, birds, and women, and expressive of “the irony of their masculine condition.” Although the Nage metaphor identifying humans as god’s chickens equally rests on analogy, an important difference from the Bororo identification of men and macaws lies in the fact that the interpretation is one proffered by Nage themselves. For, as they explained, “we are god’s chickens” means simply that, in relation to god, human beings are as small and dependant in matters of life and death as are domestic fowls in relation to their human owners, who call them together and – since chickens are regularly killed and eaten – determine the time and circumstances of their deaths. The Nage metaphor is therefore substantially identical to the previously mentioned Nuer ant metaphor, which describes humans as being “very tiny in respect to God” (Evans-Pritchard 1956, 12). In effect, then, Nage understand their metaphor as deriving from an “external analogy” (humans: god:: chickens: owners) involving two pairs of terms and, in this way, contrasting to the “internal analogy” (men: women:: macaws: women) and the “internal metaphor” that

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

43

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 44

Crocker sees as constitutive of Bororo men’s identification with macaws. As accords with their own interpretation, Nage denied that “we are god’s chickens” implies any mystical affinity (e.g., a common descent or spiritual identity) between chickens and humans, even though, by their own analysis, the expression turns on a relationship between humans and a spiritual third party – namely, “god.” By contrast, the Bororo representation is ultimately binary, involving only birds and humans, even though the second term admits a further distinction between men and women, and the analogy this latter distinction facilitates is furthermore implicit and contingent on a particular anthropological interpretation. Another difference concerns the quasihuman status Bororo accord red macaws, which are taboo and never eaten; by contrast, chickens are the domestic animal Nage kill and consume most often. And whereas the Bororo identification with macaws is manifest largely in ritual action, the Nage identification with domestic fowls finds expression only verbally, as one of a long list of metaphors (see chapter 4) where, with reference to specific actions, circumstances, or appearances, Nage compare people to chickens in a large variety of ways.4 Evidently, then, Nage identify less exclusively with chickens than Bororo apparently do with macaws. Nevertheless, despite this difference and others, Nage identifying humans with domestic fowls and Bororo men linking themselves with pet parrots are evidently based on conceptual relations of the same formal sort. In addition, both can be called contextual insofar as it is specifically in the context of relationships with women that Bororo men identify as macaws, just as it is only in relation to god – and then mostly in the context of death – that Nage speak of themselves collectively as chickens. In this connection one can readily endorse Crocker’s (1997b, 61) observation that “metaphor postulates the ‘identity’ of two different entities only in highly specific senses.” At the same time, this selectivity, as it can also be characterized, surely applies to symbolism in general – as opposed to empirical and folk taxonomic knowledge of animals, which, as noted in the previous chapter, operates with gestalts. Indeed, this last contrast underscores the difference between symbolic linkage of any sort and connections revealed in ethnotaxonomic classifications, where animals and plants are categorized not on the basis of analogy or selective resemblance but primarily with reference to comprehensive empirical observation of perceptual similarity and dissimilarity. Another Nage metaphor sometimes employed self-referentially and applied to a large section of Nage society – in fact, all Nage adult men, a speci-

44

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 45

fication revealing another commonality with the more famous Bororo usage – is “Nage dog(s)” (lako Nage, No. 107). As both observed usage and local commentary make clear, the phrase does not refer specifically to dogs as animals kept by Nage people, even though in this society it is indeed men rather than women who normally own dogs. Instead, it compares Nage men, and more specifically men of central Nage, to male dogs in regard to sexual appetite and their special reputation for engaging in multiple extramarital and premarital relationships. In fact, both in its interpretation and recognized motivation the usage compares closely with the American English metaphor “horn dog” and the apparently older African American proverb “a man’s got too much dog in him” (Liebow 1967, 121–2; see also the 1976 recording of this title by singer Shelbra Deane), and it is similarly comparable to the Yoruba use of “dog” (ajá) as a metaphorical reference to human “sexual incontinence/promiscuity” (Olatéju 2005, 372–3). Like Bororo and American counterparts, the Nage expression turns on analogy (men: women:: male dogs: bitches); it implies that Nage men are in a particular respect – heterosexual relations – like dogs or how Nage represent dogs to be; and, like the expression identifying humans as god’s chickens, it does not entail any mystical connection between people and dogs. In regard to the specificity of features involved in this usage, it should also be remarked that dogs figure in numerous other Nage conventional metaphors and that these focus on quite different attributes of dogs. Thus, while Nage men often identify closely with their dogs (Forth 2016, 86–90), by way of conventional metaphors all Nage compare themselves to dogs with reference to many diverse features of humans and canines, and although dog metaphors are more numerous than are metaphors employing most other animals, as metaphorical vehicles Nage do not treat dogs any differently from these. If neither the Nage description of themselves as “chickens of god” nor the reference to their men as “Nage dogs” implicates any mystical or substantial identification of humans beings with fowls or canines, then something quite different obtains with another animal, the water buffalo (Bubalis bubalis). As explained elsewhere (Forth 1998; Forth 2018a), Nage consider themselves, and especially their high-ranking men, as existing simultaneously as human beings and as buffalo, specifically buffalo kept, raised, and periodically slaughtered by mountain spirits (nitu, also nitu bapu or bapu). Accordingly, when these spirits prepare to sacrifice a spirit buffalo, a human somewhere suffers illness and, in the absence of ritual countermeasures, will subsequently die. In

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

45

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 46

this way, Nage identify themselves not with ordinary, earthly buffalo but with buffalo existing in spirit form and within an unseen realm of spirits, so the representation differs, for example, from the identity Bororo men recognize between themselves and ordinary, empirical birds. It should also be noted that Nage do not identify these spirit buffalo with their “souls” (mae), spiritual components of living persons that are susceptible to other kinds of malevolent spirits (most notably, human witches). Nevertheless, since the mountain spirits are conceived to own and use water buffalo in exactly the same way as do people, and because, within their own realm, these spirit buffalo take the same form as earthly buffalo, Nage are connected with buffalo in a categorical sense. And the same applies to the buffalo-owing spirits, by virtue of the inverse idea that, whenever Nage slaughter an earthly buffalo, a spirit meets its end. For Nage, therefore, buffalo form part of a trichotomous relationship further linking spirits and humans, a relationship I have previously called “reciprocal inversion” (Forth 1998). Viewed as a set of analogical relations – wherein spirits are to spirit buffalo and spirit buffalo are to humans as humans are to earthly buffalo and earthly buffalo to spirits – in these ideas one also discovers the basis of a further identification of humans and anthropomorphous spirits that finds expression in Nage claims that spirits (nitu) regard human beings as spirits (nitu) and themselves as humans (342–3). Identifying humans in different ways with both spirits and spirit buffalo, it should be mentioned how this complex of ideas differs from Viveiros de Castro’s (1998) “perspectivist” version of animism, wherein animals are said to assume human form in some hidden dimension while humans similarly have a partial existence as empirical game animals. For in the Nage idea, the fundamental relationship is not between humans and animals but between humans and spirits, even though an animal figures as the medium by which spirits and humans have, as it were, aggressive access to one another. Indeed, the Nage representation is more suggestive of what another neo-animist writer (Descola 2013) dubs “analogism.” Insofar as Nage conceive of spirits raising and killing buffalo much in the same way as humans, there is in this idea an obvious parallel with the “chickens of god” metaphor, where god is represented as determining the fate of humans in a way similar to buffalo-owning spirits. Indeed, one might be inclined to treat the two ideas as expressions of a single representation employing different sacrificial animals, in part because Nage employ “chicken” as a

46

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 47

metaphorical understatement designating a more valuable animal, including a buffalo (see No. 298). But beyond this formal similarity is a fundamental ontological difference. Besides the fact that Nage normally speak of “god” (déwa, ga’e déwa) and buffalo-owning spirits (nitu) as quite different sorts of beings, the idea that human beings are buffalo owned by spirits is definitely not a figurative usage, like describing humans as god’s chickens or Nage men as dogs. Indeed, unlike these usages, “we are buffalo,” although expressing an idea Nage would certainly recognize, is not an assertion they themselves ordinarily make but is instead a proposition entailed in Nage spiritual cosmology, a pattern of ideas expressed both in myth (Forth 1998, 25–30) and in ritual action and interpretations thereof offered by ritual specialists. As Nage affirmed, the proposition that humans are spirit buffalo is not an instance of pata péle, a “statement that separates or covers” – which is to say a metaphor – but something that is taken as “true” (tebhe) and that Nage themselves usually do not analyze or question. Consistent with this recognized difference, the relationship between humans and (spirit) buffalo is quite different from relations of similarity between buffalo and humans expressed in Nage conventional metaphors. For one thing, being simultaneously spirit buffalo is an existential property of human beings. It is both permanent and consequential, specifically in the sense that what spirits do to their buffalo is thought to have real effects in the form of human illness or death. By contrast, nothing remotely similar applies to the twenty conventional buffalo metaphors Nage apply to humans or, for that matter, to any of their other conventional animal metaphors. That is, calling someone a “buffalo that wrecks its enclosure” (No. 13), for example, is simply declarative and practical, describing certain human actions. And while the statement, if applied to someone in direct address, could result in anger, resentment, or hurt feelings, Nage would not see it as having any physical effect comparable to what is supposed to occur when a spirit sacrifices a spirit buffalo. From these differences, which amount to what can be called a cognitive separation between two unconnected conceptions of the human-buffalo relationship, it comes as no surprise that Nage possess no conventional metaphors describing people as “buffalo” with reference to their susceptibility to attack by spirits. In this respect, then, the Nage representation seems to differ, for example, from the Balinese identification of men with fighting-cocks,

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

47

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 48

which appears completely continuous with conventional metaphors employing the cock. Rather than supernatural connections with either humans or spirits, moreover, Nage conventional buffalo metaphors reflect a thoroughly naturalistic representation of the animal Bubalis bubalis informed by regularly observed attributes of empirical buffalo or, far less often, by uses to which the animals are put (e.g., as bridewealth) and, in only in a single case (No. 2), does a metaphor reflect a belief concerning a special supra-empirical power ascribed to some earthly buffalo. In addition, Nage deploy these attributes, individually and selectively, in talking about actions or attitudes of individual humans – including, for example, behaviour suggesting a person taking after a parent (No. 11), acting like “a dog in the manger” (No. 12), “fouling one’s own nest” (No. 13), excessive attachment to children (No. 14), and behaving in a curmudgeonly manner (No. 16). From these examples, it will also be noticed how some replicate English conventional metaphors, although ones whose vehicles are of course quite different animals. In contrast, the mystical conception of humans as spirit buffalo pertains neither to ordinary dealings with buffalo nor regular social interaction with other human beings but solely to buffalo sacrifice, including occasions when people experience physical or mental distress and suspect they might be victims of spirit sacrifice – and therefore consider sacrificing one of their own buffalo as a remedy. By the same token, in mundane contexts – when herding buffalo, watering or taking the animals to graze, installing them in enclosures, or, nowadays, employing buffalo in puddling wet rice fields – Nage do not speak of, nor by all indications do they think about, the animals as embodiments of dangerous spirits. And it is, of course, precisely these mundane interactions with water buffalo that inform Nage conventional metaphors that employ the buffalo as their vehicle. All of the foregoing applies equally to another spiritual belief, although one that, it should be stressed, is not in any way articulated with the representation of humans as spirit buffalo. This is the idea that, in the domain of forest spirits (also designated as nitu), Giant rats (Papagomys armandvillei) exist as buffalo belonging to the spirits (bhada nitu) – one of a series of propositions representing wild mammals as the spirits’ domestic animals (Forth 2016, 135–40). These propositions too are not figurative usages, nor do they inform any conventional metaphors, employing Giant rats or any other wild animal.

48

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 49

Concluding Remarks Even if some anthropologists might be inclined to apply a concept of metaphor to the Nage representation of humans as spirit buffalo – something I have not found particularly useful to do either here or in previous writings – it is clear that what can broadly be called their symbolic use of this animal admits at least two quite separate forms that suggest different kinds of cognitive processing. In one, evident in conventional animal metaphors, specific empirical features of an animal, physical or behavioural, are redeployed to construct a variety of figurative expressions used to talk about individual humans or other things that are not animals. In the other, a general identification of humans with spirit buffalo most likely has its basis in the imaginative conjecture that, just as humans raise and sacrifice domestic animals, so by analogy there might be something that raises and sacrifices humans. And this compelling and indeed counterintuitive idea has evidently “caught on” and been maintained as an article of Nage cosmology, something people accept as true or possibly true. As demonstrated, however, exactly the same analogy is replicated in the expressly figurative proposition whereby Nage declare themselves to be god’s chickens. Hence one product of this discussion is the hardly surprising conclusion that formally identical propositions apparently identifying human beings as non-human animals can be understood by users in ontologically or epistemologically very different ways. Whatever other merits it might have, applying “metaphor” to both would therefore be unfortunate – certainly it would make little sense to Nage – and a case can easily be made for restricting “metaphor” to figurative usages, in other words to conventional metaphor, as does Sandor (1986, 103) when he forthrightly asserts that “no metaphor occurs where none is recognized.” Non-figurative propositions might then simply be designated as “beliefs.” There is, of course, nothing new about this. As shown, a contrast of “metaphor” and “belief ” runs throughout Evans-Pritchard’s interpretation of Nuer religion. Rather more recently, in a study of African sorcery, West (2007) rejects any application of “metaphor” to statements informants insist are literally true, cleverly (and perhaps metaphorically) characterizing such interpretations as a form of sorcery employed by ethnographers. A contrast of metaphor and belief is also employed by Sperber (1975) in his cognitive theory of symbolism, specifically where he distinguishes varieties

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

49

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 50

of symbolic cognition as “belief ” and “figure” (by which he transparently refers to conventional metaphor). Of course, symbolism is an aspect not only of thought and language but also of actions, and one merit of Sperber’s theory is his linking of “figure” and “belief,” respectively, with “mime” and “sacrifice.” Why instead of “sacrifice” he does not employ the more general category “ritual” (which would include magic and taboo) is unclear, but whatever the reason, the point is that, by contrast to mime, sacrifice (or ritual) is typically understood by participants as possessing efficacy – as making rather than simply marking a change – and as thereby corresponding to “belief ” as something pertaining to entities accepted as efficacious and consequential. It hardly needs remarking that “belief ” is a highly problematic category of cross-cultural comparison, not least because of its association with the doctrinal faith crucial to Christianity (Needham 1972). However, no suitable substitute is plainly available. Even apart from its established use in linguistics as a reference to themes informing conventional metaphors, “conceptual metaphor” will not do, especially because conceptual metaphors are themselves metaphoric and are likely to be recognized as such by users of derivative conventional metaphors. (Think, for example, of “people are animals,” which, before Linnaeus and Darwin, English-speakers employing conventional animal metaphors could not have accepted as anything other than a figurative proposition.) As the contrary of “metaphor,” “belief” is an acceptable reference to ideas not subject to empirical test – such as human beings having a parallel existence as spirit buffalo – so long as the term is understood as referring to propositions that a community accepts uncritically, without analyzing them in relation to other items of knowledge that could discredit them. Thus defined, it is of course this unanalyzed quality of “beliefs” that distinguishes them from (conventional) metaphors. As demonstrated by Nage recognition of their animal metaphors as pata péle (“separating or covering speech”), which is to say figurative expressions that cannot be taken literally, metaphors are indeed statements that have effectively been analyzed and have been found, as it were, acceptably deviant (cf. Sandor 1986, 105–6) in relation to other uses of the same words. Sperber (1975) employs the unanalyzed quality of certain propositions as the primary criterion in distinguishing symbolic knowledge (or “symbolism in general,” the translation of the original French title of his book) from empirical or “encyclopaedic” knowledge. However, insofar as conventional metaphors are a form of symbolism, they must be a

50

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 51

special kind, and contrary to Sperber, who simply treats “metaphor” (or “figure”) and “belief ” as two manifestations of a single form of cognition, they must reflect a special form of symbolic thinking – one that is consciously or expressly symbolic. Expressed another way, with metaphors disbelief is deliberately suspended and knowingly so (Sandor 1986, 117; see also Levin 1993, 121) since this suspension is necessary to preserve the connection between source (vehicle) and target (interpretation or referent) and, hence, the social, intellectual, or emotional value of the metaphor. As will become clear in chapter 8, distinguishing metaphor and belief as cognitively different kinds of representation is essential to understanding why beliefs linking animals with spirits play virtually no part in motivating Nage animal metaphors, and why, instead, such metaphors typically draw directly on empirical features of animals or (in a far smaller number of cases) utilitarian practices involving animals. However analyzed, some distinction between metaphor and belief should find favour among proponents of ontological pluralism, the position discussed at the beginning of this chapter, especially since pluralists evidently reject any application of metaphor to anything they interpret a society’s members accepting as real or as involving an actual connection (or an absence of a distinction) between things. This of course would particularly apply to nonWestern societies, conceived as possessing ontologies radically different from the ontological “naturalism” attributed exclusively to Western thought. Yet it remains unclear how ontological pluralists could subscribe to a comparative deployment of any conception of metaphor. For accepting consciously figurative forms of language as anything other than an artefact of a peculiarly Western ontology, and more particularly as a regular way of expressing ideas in societies deemed to be “animist” (or at least not “naturalist’), would appear to undermine, or at least seriously qualify, a representation of animism – a perspective that recognizes no essential difference between humans and nonhumans – as a dominant, pervasive, or virtually exclusive way of thinking about and experiencing the world. By the same token, pluralists might want to argue that a statement like “we are god’s chickens” reveals a Nage conception of a real identity between humans and chickens. As shown, this view finds no support in what Nage themselves say about this or their other animal metaphors, nor indeed in their representation of conventional metaphors as pata péle (“covering speech”) – an indigenous understanding consistent with the bulk of ethnographic evidence revealing that Nage cannot be

M E TA P H O R S A N D “ M E TA P H O R ” I N H U M A N - A N I M A L R E L AT I O N S

51

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 52

called “animists” or exclusive adherents to any “ontology” radically different from “naturalism (Forth 2016; Forth 2018b). At the same time – and hardly surprisingly in view of their implicitly wholesale rejection of metaphor, both as an indigenous and as an analytical category – ontological pluralists, even those who, like Descola and Viveiros de Castro (e.g., Viveiros de Castro 2004), focus on human-animal relations, have not explicitly attended to conventional animal metaphors, or to what can most reasonably and parsimoniously be construed as such. So it remains uncertain how they would regard these or any other kind of apparently figurative discourse among members of smallscale non-Western societies – if indeed they recognize them at all. In addition, some proponents of the “ontological turn” apparently entertain parallel reservations about the concept of belief (Holbraad and Petersen 2017, 192–4). These circumstances, then, point to the special importance of a comprehensive study of animal metaphors in a society like that of the Nage, the possible ontological significance of which I further address in chapter 9. In the next several chapters, however, I focus on individual metaphors and how Nage employ and understand them in the course of their daily lives.

52

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 53

3 Domestic Mammal Metaphors – and Some Wild Variants

Referring to all animals, ana wa has its prototype in mammals and especially large domestic animals. More than any other kind of animal, mammals are vehicles for the greatest number of Nage animal metaphors, comprising over 42 percent (240 of 566) of the total. The next highest is birds, at 31 percent (178). As demonstrated elsewhere, “mammal” operates as a psychologically salient category – a life form taxon – in Nage folk taxonomy. Although the category is not labelled by a single word, Nage will use lako wawi, “dog [and] pig,” a standard composite, to refer to mammals as a group distinct from other animals – for example, when talking about mating practices or methods of reproduction. In discussing individual metaphors, I divide mammals into domestic and wild kinds (treated in chapter 4), reviewing these in the same order followed in Forth (2016). Thus the present chapter begins with water buffalo metaphors and ends with metaphors incorporating cats, while chapter 4 starts with deer metaphors and ends with expressions incorporating the monkey. Although cats and pigs both comprise “domestic” and “wild” kinds, distinguished with the qualifiers bo’a (“village”) and witu (“forest”; see e.g., wawi bo’a, “village pigs,” and wawi witu, “forest pigs”), largely to facilitate comparison with Nage mammal knowledge described in Forth (2016) I deal with all pig and all cat metaphors in the present chapter. How far this distinction is significant for metaphorical uses of the two animals is then discussed in individual commentaries. Nage folk taxonomy includes eighteen named folk-generic categories of mammals (Forth 2016, 253, table 11.1). All of these are employed metaphorically with the exception of ana menge or dhéke menge (denoting mice and

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 54

small rats) and dhéke ngewo (a large forest rat). What is more, the first, especially, is implicitly encompassed by several metaphors employing dhéke (see Nos. 180–96), interpreted as a more inclusive “intermediate” taxon (sensu Berlin 1992) subsuming five generic categories of rats and mice, though also referring contextually to large commensal rats (specifiable as dhéke méze, “big rat”). The only mammal “folk-specifics” used metaphorically are ngo ngoe, denoting what Nage conceive to be a specific kind of wild cat (meo; Forth 2016, 99–101; Forth 2017b), and wawi witu, specifying wild pigs.

WATER BUFFALO • Bubalus bubalis • BHADA Larger than both horses and recently introduced cattle, water buffalo are the largest animals known to Nage. They are also the most valuable, being the most expensive component of bridewealth and the premier animal sacrifice. In both respects, it is interesting that the name bhada is related to words in other Indonesian languages meaning “wealth,” thus paralleling English “cattle” in relation to “chattel.” Until recently Nage were familiar with buffalo not only as domestic livestock but also as feral animals and objects of the hunt. With just one or two exceptions (Nos. 4, 13), however, Nage buffalo metaphors have their source in the domestic animal. 1. Ancient horns Tadu waja Someone who has lived long and thus possesses much life experience As the horns in question are those of buffalo, the usage is comparable to “buffalo measuring their horns” (No. 17). As Nage confirmed, the expression links people metaphorically with old, mature buffalo whose horns have grown long, and so it is quite different from the Nage belief according to which people who attain an extraordinary age will actually grow a small tail (Forth 2018a). 2. Buffalo able to transform Bhadha bali be’o A duplicitous person, a trickster; a clever person able to adapt readily to circumstances

54

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 55

The term describes a male buffalo reserved for sacrifice that is reputedly able to temporarily assume the form of a human being, sometimes its male owner (Forth 1998, 54, 166–8). Such buffalo are also claimed to be capable, while still tethered, of somehow travelling to distant places and doing damage to other people’s crops. In contrast to metaphors grounded in the behaviour of ordinary buffalo, the phrase thus reflects a belief in the supernatural powers of some sacrificial buffalo, and although it applies only to a small number of individual animals, it is apparently related to the close identification of sacrificial victims and human owners found in many societies. Some Nage attribute the powers of transforming buffalo specifically to a special spiritual quality called mae mango, although this entity is also spoken of as a collective power pertaining to buffalo in general. If there is any connection between the notion of “transforming buffalo” and the idea that humans exist simultaneously as buffalo belonging to spirits (chapter 2), it was not articulated in Nage statements about this metaphor. Where “transforming buffalo” is used in the sense of a duplicitous person, it is usually uttered as a warning to others to beware of someone. In the other sense, it can function as a proverb advising people to emulate such fantastic animals (“we should be like transforming buffalo,” kita ngusa bhia bali be’o). 3. Buffalo bull sniffing a female buffalo’s urine Bhada ingo cio A person with an excessively serious or pained facial expression Apart from informant specifications, the fact that the urine belongs to a cow buffalo is indicated by cio, which, in contrast to suka (“male urination, urination in general”), specifies a woman urinating. As Nage say stallions and males of imported cattle habitually sniff at the urine of mares and cows in the same way, the specification of buffalo appears somewhat arbitrary. 4. Buffalo carrying vines on top of its head Bhada su’u koba A person who carries a heavy load but fails to tie it up or otherwise secure it properly In this circumstance the load is likely to come apart and its contents are likely to fall. In a broader sense, the metaphor can describe someone who works

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

55

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 56

Figure 1 Buffalo with a nose-ring (No. 7)

hard but in a disorderly and thus ineffective or ineffectual way. Usually expressed as a simile, the first application therefore entails a simple physical comparison whereas the second conveys a more abstract, moral allusion. The phrase describes a feral buffalo that is rummaging in the forest and whose head and horns become entangled in jungle vines. Typically in this situation, the vines do not become so firmly attached that they will not soon come loose and fall off. 5. Buffalo defecating as it moves Bhada ta’i la’a A messy, untidy person, especially in the performance of some task One use of the metaphor I recorded was “you work like a buffalo shitting as it walks” (kau kema bia bhada ta’i la’a). As noted for the metaphorical use of

56

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 57

“buffalo dung” (No. 6), the animal’s excrement characteristically forms a solid clump, but when a buffalo defecates as it moves, the faeces obviously become scattered, fouling a wider area. 6. Buffalo dung Ta’i bhada Someone who never changes or is immoveable and difficult to shift Usually expressed as “to live like buffalo dung,” the metaphor can convey a negative evaluation. Nevertheless, Some Nage interpret it as referring to a group of people that is united, or at least residentially not scattered or dispersed. Buffalo faeces characteristically form a solid, immobile heap, unlike the droppings of some other animals, and in the same regard a contrasting metaphor is “goat droppings” (No. 70). In English idioms, shit of any sort usually if not invariably conveys negative associations. For Nage, by contrast, dung in certain respects can represent a positive value. Another expression exploiting the same image is “a whetstone stuck in a clump of buffalo dung” (watu dhédhe ena ta’i bhada), referring to someone who visits a place and will not leave. 7. Buffalo fitted with a nose-ring Bhada tusu héle People who simply follows others, who will do anything they are told and obey instructions automatically and without thought An alternative is “buffalo tied by a nose-ring” (bhada ike héle). Although obedience and following orders are naturally valued by Nage, this phrase expresses a negative judgment. Perhaps most significantly in this context, Nage fit buffalo with nose-rings – traditionally made of a kind of liana – when leading them to slaughter. (Figure 1 shows a buffalo with a modern nose-ring.) The Nage metaphor is obviously comparable to English “lead (someone) by the nose.” 8. Buffalo goes first, horse follows Bhada ulu, ja dhéko A prominent, authoritative person who is followed by someone less influential or of lower standing

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

57

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 58

The metaphor is usually applied to men and alludes to the requirement that, with every buffalo given as bridewealth, a horse must be provided as well. Thus Nage commonly express bridewealth amounts simply by referring to a number of buffalo, its being understood that the same number of horses should also be given. The precedence of buffalo in this context is further shown in the standard composite phrase bhada ja, “buffalo [and] horses,” where “buffalo” always comes before “horses.” A more elaborate expression is bhada ja wea, “buffalo, horses, [and] gold,” the three principal components of bridewealth, incorporating both livestock and metal goods. 9. Buffalo in the shade Bhada au bao A person who is constantly chewing on food or betel and areca nut As Nage remarked, buffalo will regularly make chewing motions while standing in a shady spot even though they are not actually eating or grazing – an apparent reference to chewing the cud. Recorded just once, the phrase can be applied critically to someone who is largely inactive and, perhaps annoyingly, appears to do little more than eat or chew. (The nut of the areca palm and the leaf or fruit of the betel vine are traditionally chewed, together with lime, as a mild intoxicant.) 10. Buffalo mounting a dog Bhada saka lako A high-ranking man who marries or cohabits with a woman of lower rank Saka, “to mount, ride,” denotes riding a horse (saka ja) but also refers to sexual mounting. Apart from using animals to talk about humans, the expression is also metaphorical or, more specifically, metonymic insofar as it employs the sexual act to allude to a wider conjugal relationship. With regard to traditional Nage society, the phrase would often refer to a master, or “nobleman” (mosa laki, No. 20), who cohabits with a female slave or concubine (fai sada taga, “wife for resting the legs”). In this last phrase, “wife” is itself metaphorical insofar as marriage was not formally possible between people of unequal rank, and a lower-ranking wife was not recognized as a “true, proper, legitimate wife” (fai laki) in a union legitimated by an exchange of bridewealth and counter-gift. The person of higher rank is thus identified

58

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 59

by the larger and more valuable animal (the buffalo) and the lower-ranking partner by the smaller and less valuable (the dog). Buffalo and dogs figure as major and minor components of bridewealth and other goods given by wife-taking to wife-giving affines. The distinction of rank between dog and buffalo applies in the same way in the opposite situation, expressed as “a dog mounting a buffalo” (No. 91), where a lower-ranking man enters a relationship with a higher-ranking woman. In both instances it is the male who “mounts” the female. 11. Buffalo over in Kawa follows its forebear(s), moved to a new enclosure it sticks to the old ways Bhada lépa Kawa dhuzu dhi ngata, séso pau kopo tedu [or dhéko] ta’a olo A person who (despite changed circumstances) continues to take after his or her parent A proverb, the expression is most often applied to a woman who misbehaves sexually, having affairs with other men even after she has married and moved to her husband’s residence (the new “enclosure,” a stone corral or other place where buffalo are stalled), thus taking after her mother or, perhaps, another senior female relative. Commentators compared the usage to a botanical metaphor, although one that applies equally to men. This is “fruit that does not fall far from the tree” (ze’a bedhu mona zeu ena pu’u ngata), a usage that replicates the virtually identical English proverb “the apple does not fall far from the tree.” Both Nage usages are significant as they attest to a conception of negative character traits or tendencies being inherited from parents. How far this is thought to derive from example as opposed to something passed physically from parent to child is difficult to say. However, Nage do possess an idea of physical inheritance, expressed in metaphors of “blood” (‘a) and “seed” (wini). The present expression is heard in variant forms. Sometimes “old ways” (ta’a olo, or “what is old, past”) is replaced by wini ta’a olo, “old seed,” in which respect it is noteworthy that “seed” refers metaphorically to women, especially women transferred in marriage. Understood as a reference to parents or ascendants, dhi (more generally “side, edge”) should be compared to dhi ‘a, “side of the blood,” a term contextually applied to ancestors in general or, specifically, to lineal ascendants through women. Tedu and dhéko

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

59

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 60

(“to follow, succeed”) are synonyms. The referent of kawa is somewhat uncertain, although most commentators understood it as a particular place: Kawa Labo, in the Labo (Lambo) district to the northeast of central Nage. Together with the fact that lépa is a deictic directional term used in Géro and other areas to the northeast (and equivalent to central Nage zale), this would suggest that the proverb is adopted from elsewhere. Kawa is also interpretable as “cave, rock shelter” (more completely kawa so), places where buffalo released to graze freely, as well as feral buffalo, often take shelter. On the other hand, the occurrence of Labo as a geographical name in a similar metaphor for disobedient wives (No. 87) suggests a synecdochical reference to any distant place. 12. Buffalo that blocks the wallow Bhada pe poma Someone who prevents others from joining in what he or she is doing, a monopoliser who wants to keep something all for him- or herself Pe is a contracted form of péle, “to block, bar, obstruct; to lie athwart” (see chapter 2). As the phrase describes a buffalo wallowing in a muddy pool (poma) that obstructs other buffalo from entering, it is comparable to the English animal metaphors “to hog (something)” and “road hog.” Also similar is English “dog in the manger,” derived from one of Aesop’s fables (Palmatier 1995, 116), although this specifically refers to someone who keeps others from partaking of or enjoying something that the person him- or herself does not want or cannot make use of. 13. Buffalo that wrecks its enclosure Bhada léga oka People who cause trouble within their own house or settlement or do damage to their own group The phrase can also be used more generally for a troublemaker. Oka denotes a temporary enclosure of bamboo, obviously more fragile and more easily damaged than a stone corral (kopo), and can more specifically refer to an enclosure built for a single buffalo destined for sacrifice or one housing a feral buffalo or horse one wishes to break or tame. In the present usage, the buffalo’s enclosure refers less to a physical house or village than to a social group,

60

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 61

the unity of which a troublesome person can damage. The Nage metaphor is thus effectively synonymous with English “fouling one’s own nest,” meaning “to disgrace your own family; to destroy your own environment” (Palmatier 1995, 155). 14. Buffalo thinking of its calf Bhada he ana A mother or father closely attached to her or his children The metaphor more particularly expresses what Nage consider unusual or excessive parental affection and is mostly applied to situations in which parental love or attachment becomes a particular issue. For example, one man used it in mildly rebuking his wife who was habitually reluctant to leave their young children in the care of others when she had to leave home for any length of time. Another instance concerned a man whose wife had left him and, somewhat unusually, insisted on retaining the children. According to one interpretation, buffalo are the appropriate animal vehicle because cow buffalo become aggressive when one attempts to separate them from unweaned calves and will make great efforts to return to them. In another view, the selection of buffalo mostly reflects their status as the most valuable and largest of livestock. 15. Buffalo tied by the horns Bhada ike tadu A recalcitrant or rebellious person who will not accept what others say and is difficult to persuade If a rope is tied to a buffalo’s horns, as is done in the sacrificial procedure known as pa sése where the animals are slaughtered while running relatively freely on the end of a long cable, the animal is unlikely to follow when one pulls on the rope and is likely to struggle – in contrast to a buffalo tethered by a nose-ring (No. 7). 16. Buffalo in foul-smelling water Bhada ae wau A person who is discontent and so appears angry or dissatisfied

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

61

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 62

The usual reference is a man or woman who is by nature generally discontented or dissatisfied – a curmudgeon or carper whom others try to avoid. But it more specifically refers to a facial expression suggesting anger, dissatisfaction, or disgruntlement and so can also designate a temporary or less permanent disposition (cf. English “turning up one’s nose [at something]”). The metaphor describes a buffalo that, following one especially articulate account, goes to a waterhole to drink but finds the water dirty and smelly, likely having been fouled by faeces, and thus declines to drink. Waterholes or wallows are indeed often dirty and full of dung. But whether water buffalo are really as particular as the metaphor would suggest seems unlikely. 17. Buffaloes measuring (or testing) their horns Bhada zagu tadu Two individuals or parties testing their mutual strength in some competitive exchange The image pertains to two bull buffalo butting their horns against one another until one gives in. Accordingly, the phrase usually refers to two men or two groups led by men. One example is two young men sparring in the traditional pugilistic competitions called etu (Forth 1998); the expression is also applied to contestants who, in terms of age, size, and strength, appear equally matched. Another example is competitive negotiations between two parties over bridewealth, where the bride’s group (the wife-giver) may begin by requesting a large number of buffalo. The husband’s group then responds by requesting in return a large number of pigs and textiles (components of the wife-taker’s counter-gift) until an agreement is finally reached. At the beginning of negotiations, neither side will know for certain the capacity of the other to provide, so in this instance the metaphor alludes to an attempt to extract the greatest amount possible from the other party. 18. Cow buffalo that urges (or leads) others on Bhada metu ngati A provocateur; a tempter or temptress who leads another astray Examples of referents included a particular woman (now deceased) who, for a fee, would recruit men for sexual liaisons with young women, especially at festivals or other large gatherings where people celebrate well into the evening

62

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 63

or overnight. Another concerned someone who encourages others to engage in gambling games or to wage more than they are initially inclined to do. Nage explained the motivation in two slightly different ways. According to one, the metaphor reflects the use of a buffalo cow as “bait” to attract bull buffalo (including free-ranging bulls) either to mate or simply to draw a herd together and follow a herder – as is also done with other large livestock. According to another commonly voiced interpretation, a buffalo herd is always led by one or more female animals while other buffalo, including all the males, follow behind. Such a categorical claim would appear unlikely, although no one seriously questioned it, and I also recorded it in the Lio region. On the other hand, there is a further idea that, while the females go in front when a buffalo herd moves, they are driven by males that push from behind or occasionally from the side or towards the front and so ultimately determine the direction in which the herd travels. The Nage metaphor somewhat recalls English “bellwether,” referring to a harbinger, something that indicates or predicts something else, which originally denoted a castrated ram around whose neck a bell is hung and who leads a flock of sheep. As a harbinger, however, the ram usually evokes something positive whereas in the Nage usage the female buffalo is always negative. 19. Following the cow (buffalo), coming behind the mare Dhéko moka, tedu metu A man who resides temporarily with his wife’s family because bridewealth is not fully discharged Since moka (a young female mammal) and metu (an older female that has given birth) denote females of all kinds of larger livestock, “cow” and “mare” are somewhat arbitrary. Nevertheless, this can be treated as a buffalo metaphor because, while both buffalo and horses compose the principal part of a bridewealth, Nage always describe this as “buffalo [and] horse(s)” (bhada ja) and never the other way around, and also because they speak of horses in this context as accompanying buffalo (see No. 8). That the metaphor refers to a uxorilocally resident husband is explained by the fact that such a man follows his wife (represented by the female animals) and also by the fact that, moving from his own group to the woman’s, he travels in the same direction as did that part of a bridewealth already given to his in-laws.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

63

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 64

20. True bull (buffalo) Mosa laki Person of highest rank Although mosa refers to the males of nearly all mammals (Forth 2016, 151– 4), in this expression it is understood as referring specifically to water buffalo. The Nage relationship to buffalo is in several respects comparable to what Evans-Pritchard (1940) described for cattle among the East African Nuer, who similarly designate leading men as “bulls.” Laki is is related to words in other Indonesian languages meaning “man, male, husband” (senses of Nage haki) but in Nage means “true, genuine, legitimate.” As a reference to individuals, mosa laki always refers to men, specifically male leaders; however, as the name of a social rank, it can include women as well. 21. Buffalo cricket Cico bhada A large kind of cricket This is one of several folk taxonomic names in which “buffalo” (bhada) specifies the larger or largest of two or more sub-classes. Comparable English usages incorporating large domestic animals include “bull” in “bullfrog,” “bulltrout,” and “bulrush,” and “horse” in “horse chestnut” and “horseradish” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary; Palmatier 1995, 200). A smaller, edible kind of cricket is called “pig cricket” (No. 135). 22. Buffalo leech Mate bhada A large kind of leech A smaller kind of leech is called “chicken leech” (No. 287) 23. Buffalo flatworm Mage bhada A large kind of terrestrial planarian (or flatworm; phylum Platyhelminthes, class Turbellaria).

64

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 65

A smaller kind is simply named mage, this term also denoting the more inclusive category. 24. Buffalo basil Hasi bhada A type of herb Used as a spice, this is possibly Ocimum basilicum, or Great basil. As Nage explain, the plant is named after buffalo because its leaves are larger than those of two other sorts of hasi (hasi biasa and hasi lowo). 25. Buffalo coconut Nio bhada A variety of coconut palm So named because of its very large nuts, larger than those of other coconut palms (nio). The main contrast is the “dove coconut” (No. 407). 26. Buffalo ginger Lea bhada A type of ginger plant The largest sort, the plant contrasts to “dog ginger” (No. 113) and “chicken ginger” (No. 290). 27. Buffalo’s uvula Ngade bhada A sort of grass In neighbouring Ngadha, one referent of ngade is Paspalum conjugatum (Verheijen 1990, 34), a species of crown grass that, interestingly enough, sometimes bears the English name “buffalo grass.” Nage ngade means “uvula” (more completely known as lasu ngade), and two commentators suggested the grass was so named because it is similarly hard or tough and difficult to uproot.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

65

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 66

28. Buffalo testicle lemon Mude ‘ade bhada A large citrus The fruit is so named because it grows to the size of a buffalo’s testicles. 29. Buffalo testicle tuber Kéwa ‘ade bhada A sort of edible tuber The tuber is thus named because in regard to its size, round shape, and lack of root hairs it is seen to resemble a buffalo’s testicles. 30. Buffalo weed Bete bhada A kind of plant

Figure 2 “Dove” and “buffalo” coconuts (No. 25)

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 67

Verheijen (1990) gives “buffalo weed” (bete kamba) in Lio as Sida acuta, a flowering plant, and in Ngadha (bete kaba) as a flowering plant in the mint family (Lamiaceaae). Nage bete appears to have no meaning other than as a plant name. Kamba and kaba are the Lio and Ngadha terms for “buffalo.” 31. Earth buffalo Bhada tana A human corpse or soul turned into a sacrificial victim by witches The usage reflects a mortuary belief according to which cannibalistic witches (polo), living humans who have fallen under the control of malevolent spirits, will transform a newly buried person (either the corpse or the soul) into a buffalo and then slaughter and devour the animal in a nocturnal feast. Whether all recently deceased people undergo this fate is not specified, but Nage mortuary rites include acts and precautions predicated on this idea (Forth 1998). 32. Trough buffalo Bhada kana A pig sacrificed in place of a buffalo Kana is a container for pig feed. As the usage entails referring to a pig as a “buffalo,” it is clearly metaphorical. As anthropologists will recognize, the practice of sacrificing something of lesser value when a prescribed sacrifice is unavailable is widespread and is perhaps most famously and dramatically illustrated by the Nuer practice of “sacrificing” a cucumber in place of an ox (Evans-Pritchard 1956). Among Nage, substitution is not always possible and in fact is allowed only in critical rituals, such as when a buffalo should be slaughtered in order to counter serious illness. With regard to the concept of “earth buffalo” (No. 31), substituting a buffalo with a pig is apparently also possible among witches. 33. Buffalo’s back (hut) (Kéka) logo bhada A kind of building Used for storage or as temporary accommodation, such huts have both gable ends open and a pitched roof that notionally resembles a buffalo’s back.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

67

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 68

HORSE • Equus caballus • JA (dialectal jara) When exactly horses were introduced to Flores is not known (Forth 2016, 79–82). Apart from their use as bridewealth and in other contexts of exchange, Nage value horses as a means of transporting people and goods, and although nowadays they are being increasingly replaced by motor vehicles, horses are still used as mounts, and Nage, who are skilled riders, always use horses during the annual ritual hunt. All of these usages, as well as the general care of horses, are referenced in the metaphors listed below. 34. Coming behind the mare, Tedu metu. See Following the cow (No. 19) 35. Fine stallion Ja mosa modhe A handsome man Although modhe has the general sense of “good,” it more specifically means “good-looking” in regard to both men and women. In English, “stallion” and “stud” similarly refer to virile or sexually attractive men; however, the Nage usage concerns a man’s dress and demeanour as much as his bodily appearance. 36. Horse down in the plain Ja lau mala A person who lives freely or is unrestrained The usual referent is someone who travels about without good reason, being absent from home for several days at a time – a decidedly negative trait for Nage. The source of the metaphor is a horse left free to graze in the plains. Whereas central Nage villages mostly occupy the lower northwestern slopes of the Ebu Lobo volcano, mala (“lowland, plain”) denotes the lower-lying, less accidented and less inhabited area to the north, located in the seaward direction (lau, also translating as “down, downstream”). Although since the 1940s or 1950s parts of this region have been turned over to wet rice cultivation, this is where Nage villagers would formerly release horses and buffalo to roam freely. As this should suggest, “horse down in the plain” designates a

68

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 69

free-ranging horse that is beyond the immediate control of human owners. (It does not, I was assured, refer to feral horses, although these too were once found in the plains.) Because the metaphor refers to people who do not abide by social conventions, it is also one of several Nage usages suggesting a generally negative evaluation of the “seaward, downstream” (lau) direction (Nos. 87, 103, 164, 487). Related to this is a contextual use of lau in the sense of “outside” and of opposite spatial terms (zéle, “up”; zéta, “upstream, landward”) to mean “inside” – as when referring to the innermost part of a house or the interior of a village and, furthermore, all locations outside of Flores (as in lau Kanada, “in Canada”). Similarly, Nage associate the lau direction with witches, the ultimate human outsiders, who, contrary to prescription, are said to sleep with their heads pointing in this direction and to be buried thus (Forth 1993, 101). In addition, many people identified as witches in central Nage appear to derive ultimately from war captives and slaves formerly obtained from northern, and thus seaward, regions. However, in all metaphors where the direction term is linked with an animal, this either has a clear geographical or ecological basis or reflects lau as a reference to an outside or exterior place, thus none actually attests to a symbolic or non-empirical motivation bound up with an association with witches (see chapter 8). 37. Horse follows, Ja dhéko. See Buffalo goes first (No. 8). 38. Horse returning with a trophy head Ja nuka woko Someone who is extremely pleased or joyful, especially after having achieved something or proven victorious An alternative expression is “horse celebrating a head” (ja woko ulu). Woko denotes triumphal cheers uttered by hunters returning with the trophy heads of deer and wild pigs, and in former times with human heads after a military victory. More generally, it refers to celebratory rites performed after to’a lako, the annual collective ritual hunt of pigs and deer, or after a successful war expedition, when the severed head of the leader of the defeated party would be brought into the victors’ village. Commentators, however, described the metaphor as referring specifically to cheers and chants performed in connection with the annual hunt (probably because indigenous warfare and the

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

69

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 70

taking of enemy heads are nowadays things not experienced by anyone still living). At the same time, and as the dual application of woko (or woko ulu; ulu is “head”) should suggest, Nage represent the annual hunt itself as a form of warfare (Forth 2016, 105–6). After a successful hunt, one or more horses are used to carry animal heads, and these always precede the other riders. On their return home (nuka), the men chant and utter cries of exaltation, to which Nage say the horses will always respond by neighing, as it were participating in a celebration of the hunters’ success – possibly a response to either or both the sound of loud human voices or the smell of blood. 39. Horse that accepts a large rice container Ja sawo sa’a A person who is always ready to help, a willing person Sa’a are large plaited baskets in which newly harvested rice is placed for loading onto the backs of horses when transporting the rice from field to village. Besides “accept,” sawo conveys the sense of “to pick up, fetch” and “to be agreeable to, comply with.” The metaphor thus describes a horse that does not object and readily cooperates when a heavy container is placed on its back. 40. Horse that cannot be led Ja kido talo An obstinate or contrary person, someone who is not compliant Kido is “to pull,” and the phrase refers to leading a horse by a rope. The expression is generally synonymous with “horse with a hard neck” (No. 45). 41. Horse that dances to the drum Ja dogo laba Someone too quick to respond to an invitation The expression was explained as describing, more specifically, “a horse that dances as soon as the drum is struck” – or, more exactly, when drums and gongs (laba go) are played since drums and gongs are typically played together. As Nage further point out, horses do not actually dance (prance, cavort) in time to the rhythm of a gong and drum orchestra, or do so only

70

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 71

Figure 3 Horses about to be led to pasture (No. 40)

incidentally. Rather, a horse trained to dance will simply begin moving immediately on hearing the drum. Nage sometimes interpreted the metaphor more specifically as a reference to people who are not especially industrious – particularly in the context of collective labour in cultivated fields or in house construction – but who are always first in line when the call to eat goes out. Nage regard such behaviour as coarse, ill-mannered, and a sign of greed, and people are expected to display reticence and restraint whenever such an invitation is made, regardless of how hungry they might be. 42. Horse that will not stop when one pulls on the reins Ja edo talo A person who cannot be restrained

71

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 72

Denoting someone who in the English metaphor cannot be “reined in,” the metaphor is comparable, although not identical in its reference, to “a horse that cannot be led” (No. 40). 43. Horse wary of ledges Ja taku teda A cautious or hesitant person The metaphor’s specific vehicle is a horse that is descending a slope divided into levels and that hesitates at the edge of each ledge (teda). In regard to both humans and riding horses, Nage mostly regard such caution positively. Although taku more generally means “afraid, frightened, fearful” (cf. Indonesian takut), it is better translated here as “wary.” Much could be written about the Nage use of taku and the mental states it denotes, but it may suffice to note that fear is treated less negatively among Nage than among Westerners. As I have often observed among both Nage and other Flores populations, people are less reluctant to confess to feelings of fear, and saying that one is afraid of doing something is regularly given, and accepted, as sufficient reason for not doing it. 44. Horse whose mane can be stroked, pressed down Ja pou odu A compliant person Usually applied to someone of low status who is easily subordinated, the phrase was explained by commentators as referring specifically to a horse whose mane can be stroked forward, or against the grain. This is something that many horses will resist. 45. Horse with a hard (inflexible) neck Ja tengu dego A person unwilling to comply or who cannot be persuaded Referring to someone who is stubborn or obstinate (or “stone-headed,” ulu watu, as Nage say) the usage is more or less synonymous with “horse that cannot be led” (No. 40). Like this last expression, the metaphor expresses a negative evaluation and is apparently never used in a positive sense – for

72

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 73

example, to refer to a person of firm convictions. Although the Nage metaphor specifically mentions a horse, the expression is otherwise identical to English “hard-necked,” meaning obstinate or inflexible. 46. Horse with a long penis Ja lasu léwa An idle man who roams about aimlessly or without good intention The expression is usually applied disparagingly to young male loafers who wander about in groups. Although described as coarse and, according to some, is never employed by women, in fact I first heard it from a woman. “Long penis” is understood as an erect penis. As several Nage pointed out, when a stallion becomes aroused its penis emerges from the preputial sheath but does not become completely or permanently erect and so will sway up and down or from side to side – like young, idle men wandering hither and yon. As this should suggest, the metaphor is motivated not by the behaviour of aroused stallions but specifically by their penises, and accordingly the expression does not particularly allude to the sexual appetites or exploits of young men. As one man humorously remarked, “the male members of men described as horse with a long penis may be no more than a few centimeters in length and nothing like a stallion’s!” It is also relevant that “penis” (lasu) is commonly used by Nage men as a general term of abuse, often in a semi-humorous way, for other males of about the same age – as for example in the oft-heard kau lasu kau, “you prick,” or kau lasu ema kau, “(you are) your father’s penis.” Comparable usages are of course found in other parts of the world. 47. Horse with a soft (flexible) neck Ja tengu meku A person who is easily led or who too freely cedes to requests Obviously the opposite of “horse with a hard neck” (No. 45), the metaphor expresses the negative quality of readily giving in or, as one man expressed this, being “too willing to compromise.” As one woman explained, people who immediately cede to requests from outsiders may do so without giving sufficient thought to future needs of themselves or their families, or to how they will meet obligations to kin and affines, whose anger they may therefore later incur. On the other hand, the expression sometimes

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

73

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 74

has a positive referent, describing an accommodating person or someone willing to compromise. In either case the metaphor has two possible empirical bases. A horse with a “flexible neck” is one that is easily led or directed, but it is also one that, as one informant explained, “immediately nods” (siba nugu) in agreement. In this second respect, the metaphor is largely synonymous with one incorporating the beetle named muku te’a (No. 523), and in regard to both usages, it should be noted that, among Nage as among Westerners, nodding the head up and down signals agreement, acknowledgment, or understanding, while shaking the head sideways expresses the opposite meaning. Yet another Nage metaphor referring to giving things away too freely is “pissing on stone” (bhia cio tolo watu). As was explained, in this circumstance the urine runs away freely instead of being absorbed, as occurs when urine falls on soil. 48. Horse with its bridle removed Ja lua kume Someone who dives into a meal or who too hastily begins any activity Kume refers more specifically to the “bit” placed in the horse’s mouth, but the phrase generally describes a horse that has had its entire bridle removed after the rider, always a male, has reached his destination. Thus unencumbered, typically a horse will immediately begin to graze, hence the metaphor applies to a person who, on returning home or stopping work, immediately begins eating. As Nage explain, before beginning a meal (e.g., after returning from the fields), a person should relax for a while or clean up and perhaps change dirty clothing. In part, the metaphor is comparable to the English “to eat like a horse,” something that similarly carries a negative connotation. However, the Nage phrase also has the more general reference of someone who is impatient and in too much of a hurry to begin any activity. 49. Stick horse (and) dog adept at climbing, advance together biting (but) return kicking Ja tua lako lebi, kai kiki walo wedhi A person who receives assistance from others but later rejects or treats them badly

74

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 75

In a somewhat more specific interpretation, the metaphor refers to someone who gains the support of an erstwhile adversary in opposing a common foe but, after gaining victory, resumes his or her former dispute. Although the motivation is rather complex, it is nevertheless widely recognized among Nage. “Stick horse” refers to a child’s toy horse made from the branch of an Arenga palm (tua), while “dog adept at climbing” literally denotes a hunting dog that is skilled in ascending and descending inclines (lebi is “slope, hillside”). In one view, both terms can be understood as names given to individual riding horses, but this seems not to be essential to the interpretation. As commentators further remarked, a palm branch hobby horse will swing from side to side potentially striking anyone the rider passes, while similarly, a dog skilled in climbing is likely to collide with slower members of a pack when running up or down a slope. Thus both terms refer to things likely to harm companions. Although naturally denoting a behaviour of hunting dogs, “biting” (kiki, also meaning “to attack or kill with teeth and jaws”) is understood here as meaning hunting (together) and thus as equally applicable to both dogs and horses. On the other hand, “kicking” is obviously specific to horses. The common foes are, of course, game animals. 50. Horse without a stake Ja toka mona A person with too much freedom and who lacks direction Toka denotes a stout stake driven into the ground for tying up animals, especially in treeless areas. Nage understand the expression as pertaining to people who lack guidance, perhaps through no fault of their own, as well as to people who behave irresponsibly, ignoring the instructions or wishes of parents or others in authority. (In the first sense, a comparison may be referring to someone in English as being insufficiently “anchored.”) The metaphor somewhat overlaps with “horse down in the plain” (No. 36), but commentators disagreed about the extent of the difference. 51. Mare that consorts with a younger stallion Ja haki azi A married woman who shows especial affection for a younger brother or other younger male relative of her husband

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

75

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 76

The Nage phrase has two quite different interpretations. In the present instance, haki is construed in the verbal sense of “having (or treating as) a husband,” and its object is a younger male relative (azi). In reference to horses the “husband” is a dominant stallion, the leader of a herd that monopolizes the mares and drives off younger male competitors. As a metaphor for married women, Nage described the expression in ways that implied an excessive fondness or attachment and even an improper relationship (although not necessarily of a sexual kind) between the wife and the husband’s younger sibling. An alternative gloss of exactly the same phrase serves as another metaphor (No. 57). 52. Mottled horse, Ja kéla. See Speckled fowl (No. 281) 53. Pregnant mare Ja kada Someone with a large or swollen belly The expression refers more specifically to people who eat so much their bellies become distended, thus a greedy person. Kada denotes pregnancy specifically in animals. Applied to both men and women, the usual expression is “having a belly like a pregnant horse” (tuka bhia ja kada). 54. Ride a mare Saka ja metu To copulate (of a man), to have sex with a woman The metaphor plays on the double sense of saka, “to ride (a horse)” and “to mount (a female)” in sexual intercourse. The expression is often used sardonically, for example in reference to a man who has likely been engaging a woman in sex, or at any rate is described as having been so engaged, while he should have been doing something else. On one occasion it was directed in jest to me, when one morning I appeared unusually tired; someone observing this then suggested that I had probably spent the night “riding a mare.”

76

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 77

55. Stallion with many mares Ja metu woso A man who has (maintains relationships with) many women Insofar as “women” can mean “wives,” the metaphor is synonymous with No. 56. Denoting “mares,” however, metu should refer more generally to women, so that the phrase would also apply to a man with numerous sexual partners. 56. Wives like a horse Fai ja A man with several wives This is usually expressed as bhia fai ja, “to have wives like a horse,” or fai bhia ja. In both phrases, fai (“wife”) is understood in the verbal sense of “to have a wife, wives.” Another variant, and according to some the most correct, is fai bhia zu ja, roughly “to have wives like driving horses (mares)” (zu, “to drive forward, to herd”; see also ana bue bhia zu ja, “to have numerous girlfriends”). The specific source of the metaphor is stallions typically coupling with multiple mares. Since fai properly denotes a “legitimate” wife, the expression refers to traditional polygyny. But because polygyny is nowadays prohibited among Christian Nage, and therefore generally disapproved, the metaphor is now mostly used as a critical reference to the few men who, although formally converted, continue the practice, taking additional wives with bridewealth or inheriting brothers’ widows. The metaphor provides one of several examples in which a sexual relationship between animals stands for human marriage. 57. Younger brother of a colt Ja haki azi A very small or short man Unlike No. 51 (which is possibly a pun on the present usage), in this interpretation haki is understood in the sense of “young male mammal,” while azi (“younger sibling”) indicates an even younger animal, in this case specifically a stallion. Grammatically, however, the expression is ambiguous and so facilitates the different metaphorical usage described in No. 51.

77

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 78

58. Horse fungus (horse dung fungus) Fako ja (fako ta’i ja) One of several kinds of fungus The fungus (fako) is so named because it is commonly found growing in horse dung. Unlike other fungi, therefore, it is not eaten. 59. Young horse (or “little horse”) beats the drum Ana ja paka laba The sound of distant thunder The expression occurs in a planting song describing the imminent approach of the wet season. Whether “young horse” figures as a definite animal metaphor is however uncertain, and in fact ana ja is sometimes rendered as Ine Jawa, “Mother Jawa” (Forth 2004a, 187). The homonymous ja means “cool, cold,” but it is difficult to see how this might have bearing on the phrase.

CATTLE • Bos spp. • SAPI Known only by the Indonesian name sapi, cattle were introduced to the Nage region early in the twentieth century, during the colonial period. Whenever I asked Nage about metaphors employing cattle, I was always told there were none because cattle were new animals. In the same way, cattle, being still considered foreign, are not employed as bridewealth, although they can be slaughtered in place of water buffalo by wife-takers to provide meals for a bride’s party when the two groups come together to contract a marriage. Subsequently, however, I recorded two cattle metaphors, both described as very recent. These, then, exemplify a new animal giving rise to new metaphors, although since the animal has been present for some considerable time, these seem not to have emerged particularly quickly. 60. Balinese cow or bull Sapi Bali A coarse-mannered and insolent person

78

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 79

The metaphor has its motivation in the unpredictable and sometimes aggressive behaviour of Balinese cattle, domestic descendants of wild banteng (Bos javanicus), specifically in contrast to the characteristically calm and more even-tempered Madura cattle. Whereas Madura cattle were introduced early in the twentieth century, Balinese cattle appeared just a few decades ago and have now almost entirely replaced the Maduras. Before Balinese cattle were introduced cattle were by all indications never used as a metaphor, and it is therefore worth noting that this and the similar metaphor below (No. 61) apparently derive in part from the contrasting temperaments of the two breeds. A more specific variant of the metaphor is “to move like a Balinese cow” (la’a bhia sapi Bali), which refers to people who move quickly and carelessly, not looking where they are going and risking collision with others. 61. Face like a Balinese cow or bull Ngia bhia ngia sapi Bali A person with an angry expression This is also expressed more simply as “like a cow’s face.” One man claimed that both this and the other cow metaphor may be replacing deer metaphors (Nos. 167, 168, both referring specifically to male deer) with regard to what he and others describe as the similar habits of cattle and deer, moving quickly with their heads raised and immediately raising their heads whenever they see a human. He might also have mentioned that cattle are now the more familiar animal, and it would also seem relevant to these comparisons that, for some time, many cattle, and especially Balinese cattle, have become feral and are therefore encountered as “wild” animals. Another man remarked how, when Balinese cattle raise their heads, they appear angry and aggressive but are not necessarily so. Like many animal metaphors, accusing someone of having a cow’s face is a form of abuse and an expression of displeasure or annoyance rather than a reference to the actual appearance or any particular behaviour of the addressee.

SHEEP • Ovis aries • LEBU As sheep are virtually absent from central Nage, largely because they are not well suited to local conditions, the number of metaphors incorporating this

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

79

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 80

Figure 4 Balinese cow (No. 60)

animal is rather surprising. Sheep, however, are numerous in the north coastal region of Mbai and occur sporadically in areas further inland. And since, through marriage and otherwise, central Nage have maintained relations with Mbai and other more northerly regions, it is likely that these metaphors derive from places to the north. Sheep have come to be used occasionally in central Nage as bridewealth, in which context they are conceived as substitutes for goats, and their flesh is rated higher than goat meat. In a comparative perspective, it is interesting that all Nage sheep metaphors have a negative human referent and, moreover, that the English use of “sheep” for a timid person finds no echo in Nage usage. Curiously, the word for “sheep”

80

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 81

in Nage and other parts of Flores is related to Malay and Indonesian lembu, which denotes cattle (Forth 2016, 83). 62. Ram’s horn Tadu lebu A devious person Usually expressed as “like a ram’s horn” (bhia tadu lebu), the metaphor reflects the fact that rams’ horns are not straight but twist and curl. As in English, this and other Nage animal metaphors reveal the widespread conceptual metaphor whereby “straight” and “not straight” stand for moral virtue and its opposite (see Nos. 144, 206 regarding cat’s and civet’s tails). 63. Ram that strikes everything with its horns Lebu tolo degu An indiscriminate person Although lebu names sheep in general, Nage understand the phrase as describing a ram. A major reference is a man who is undiscriminating in sexual relations, not distinguishing between women who are permitted and prohibited (mona be’o pie zi’a). However, Nage also apply the metaphor to people who are undiscriminating in other ways, including someone who is generally intolerant of others. 64. Sheep (singular or plural) Lebu A person who heedlessly intrudes, passing between or among two or more people without caution or proper respect Usually expressed as bhia ko’o lebu lebu, “like sheep,” lebu is often reduplicated and in this case refers to several animals. According to Nage, the metaphor reflects the image of a flock of sheep mindlessly pushing forward regardless of what might lie ahead of them. A common English metaphor, of course, builds on the same ovine behaviour. A variant metaphor is la’a loza bhia ko lebu, “to move, wander like (a) sheep,” also referring to people, including children, who walk without looking where they are going and perhaps bump into other people.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

81

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 82

65. Sheep of Kebi, Kebi sheep Lebu Kebi A person from Kebi This is a retaliatory deprecation applied by ‘Ua people to residents of neighbouring Kebi, especially in response to the latter calling them ‘Ua goats (No. 73), and depicting Kebi folk as no more sophisticated than ‘Ua people. How far prosodic considerations affect this expression is moot as the metaphor’s major motivation is evidently the morphological and behavioural resemblance between sheep and goats and their generally close association in Nage representations generally. 66. Sheep’s diarrhea Loga lebu A very dirty or untidy person Sheep’s diarrhea is described as especially messy, smelly, and sticking to the body. Apparently it is this third characteristic, connected with the thick wool of sheep, that distinguishes the loose stools of this animal from those of others, so the metaphor evidently reveals the same motivation as “sheep’s placenta” (No. 67). 67. Sheep’s placenta Bau lebu A person dressed in dirty, shabby, or ill-fitting clothes, or someone who wears too many clothes A more elaborate expression of the same metaphor is sada hoba bhia ko bau lebu, “(to have) clothes like a sheep placenta.” According to an especially cogent local exegesis, when ewes give birth the placenta sticks to their long, thick wool and can thus remain hanging for some time. By contrast, the hair of goats, buffalo, and other animals is not nearly as thick so the placenta does not so readily adhere to the mother’s body. According to another interpretation, sheep’s placentae are bulky or “too large” (apparently in relation to foetuses) and are “wet, untidy, and dirty,” again by contrast to those of other animals. In regard to ill-fitting clothing that hangs loose on the body, a person

82

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 83

may be specifically described, for example, as “wearing a waistcloth or sarong (tubular garments worn by both men and women) like a sheep’s placenta” (tago hoba bhia bau lebu). As one man remarked, people who wear (too) many clothes – or are “bundled up” – may do so because they feel cold, especially early in the morning, or because they are unwell. Bau, “placenta,” is synonymous with funi, a term appearing in other animal metaphors. The more complete form is funi bau.

GOAT • Capra hirca • ‘USA (dialectal rusa) A Nage association of goats with deer is evidenced in the fact that the name ‘usa (or rusa) reflects a widespread term for deer in Malayo-Polynesian languages. This would indicate that deer preceded goats on Flores (Forth 2012a), but how long either animal has been present on the island remains unclear. The scant zooarchaeological evidence available for Flores reveals a date not earlier than four hundred years ago (Van den Bergh et al. 2009), but other evidence indicates the presence of both goats and deer in other parts of eastern Indonesia at far earlier dates (Forth 2016, 85). Although the comparative evidence from cultural uses of other animals is mixed, the occurrence of “goat” in three metaphorical names for plants (Nos. 81–3), a conventional association with dogs (No. 84), and a regular use of goats as bridewealth (Forth 2016, 141) could also indicate that Nage have been familiar with goats for some considerable time. 68. Bleating goats that hear one another, crowing cocks that answer one another ‘Usa bhe papa léle, manu kako papa walo People who live in adjoining villages This parallelistic expression describes two villages located so close to one another that, when the goats or cocks of one vocalize, those in the neighbouring settlement hear their cries and respond. Heard most often as part of formal declarations and in the recounting of clan and village histories, the phrases apply where people of one village have ceded part of their lands to immigrants, who then built a separate village close to that of the longer-established

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

83

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 84

group (Forth 2005). At the same time, the animal metaphors refer to human inhabitants of the two villages themselves and their obligation, as close neighbours, to provide mutual assistance, or to respond to (or “hear” and “answer”) one another’s needs. Cocks and goats are evidently employed because, apart from dogs, these are the animals most often kept inside or near villages and whose cries carry far. 69. Female goat butting, butting of female goats Puku ‘usa metu Someone who speaks thoughtlessly and in a way likely to cause trouble The phrase alludes to female goats, apparently unlike male goats, butting arbitrarily and thus ineffectually – the blows not hitting their mark and striking unintended targets. Accordingly, the metaphor refers to thoughtless speech that is tactless or, as one commentator put it, does not take account of people’s feelings. In one view it applies especially to women’s gossip, but the metaphor can refer to the speech of men as well. 70. Goat droppings Ta’i ‘usa A group whose members are residentially scattered or lack unity or solidarity The contrasting condition is “buffalo dung” (No. 6). The physical separation of people who are residentially dispersed directly parallels the excrement of goats, which – unlike the dung of water buffaloes – comprises small, relatively hard pellets that scatter some distance when they hit the ground. 71. Goat(s) in undergrowth, pig(s) rooting in vines ‘Usa ‘ubu, wawi koba A couple engaging in a clandestine affair or illicit sex Composing another standard parallelism, the phrases describe goats and pigs rooting about in wild vegetation outside (although possibly not too distant from) human settlements. This is one of several conventional metaphors expressing a Nage representation, and a more general conceptual metaphor, whereby illicit liaisons – relationships that do not involve a public agreement between two groups and are not contracted with an exchange of valuables –

84

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 85

are identified with sex acts performed outside of houses or settlements or, in other words, beyond the bounds of approved social order. At the same time, the forest (or “bush”) is in fact where encounters between people engaging in clandestine sexual relationships often do take place, among Nage as in many other societies. Additional metaphors alluding to the social and symbolic exteriority of illicit sex include standard references to the acts as taking place “in the middle of the forest, on the tips of wild plants” (kisa witu, lobo bene); “among trees, in rock crevices” (pu’u kaju, lia watu); and “in the middle of a journey, some way along a path” (kisa wesa, mata zala).1 The expression ‘usa ‘ubu wawi koba is considered quite coarse, partly because it can include forced sex or rape (poto péwu) rather than simply referring to people who engage in non-marital sex. The selection of goats and pigs as the vehicles of the metaphor possibly reflects the practice of keeping these animals close to villages, in contrast to buffalo and horses, which traditionally were released to roam free in “the plain” (see No. 36). On the other hand, whether this metaphorical use of goats instances a more widespread view of male goats as especially or excessively sexual creatures – as in the English metaphor “old goat,” referring to a (usually elderly) lecherous man (see Ammer 1989, 67, who gives “goat, goatish” as a reference to a “licentious or lecherous” male, man or boy) – is moot (see No. 80). Although “goat” and “pig” are usually not understood as distinguishing male and female participants in illicit relationships, pigs are associated with women in other contexts, for example as animals that accompany a bride as a major part of a wifegiver’s counter-gift, while goats are one of several kinds of animals used as bridewealth. Children of illicit sexual relationships can be identified as “offspring of goats in undergrowth …,” ana ‘usa ‘ubu, wawi koba, simply as ana ‘usa ‘ubu, or alternatively as “children of wild pigs” (No.120). In this last context, Nage identify the source as wild boars that mate with domestic sows. 72. Goat(s) jumping on companions ‘Usa dhoko moko A boisterous child, children creating a disturbance Moko means “friend, companion,” usually someone of the same sex. The metaphor involves a comparison of noisy, boisterous children with the habit of goats jumping on the backs of other goats, both males and females indiscriminately. The reference thus overlaps with that of “uncastrated goat” (No.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

85

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 86

80), and even though dhoko can mean “to mount (in sexual intercourse)” the expression does not refer to human sexual activity. As regards the animal behaviour that provides its vehicle, the Nage metaphor finds a noteworthy parallel in the ultimate derivation from Latin caper, “goat,” of the English verb “caper,” an abbreviation of “capriole,” meaning “to frolic, jump or prance about” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary). 73. Goat of ‘Ua, ‘Ua goat ‘Usa ‘Ua A person from the ‘Ua region; an unrefined, undiscriminating person Used by the people of Kebi, this is a derogatory expression addressed to the neighbouring ‘Ua people who, throughout central Nage, have a reputation for being coarse, dirty, and unsophisticated and having little respect for others. Commentators identified the metaphor’s specific source as an unruly goat that leaps hither and yon, enters cultivated fields, and causes damage. To this ‘Ua people may respond, “well, you are a Kebi sheep” (No. 65). Situated relatively high on the slopes of the Ebu Lobo volcano, ‘Ua was formerly home to a population of feral goats (Forth 2016, 84–5); however, the selection of “goat,” ‘usa, to represent ‘Ua people is in part evidently motivated by prosody. As used by other central Nage, the entire expression ‘usa ‘Ua, lebu Kebi (sometimes abbreviated as ‘usa Kebi, “Kebi goat”) lumps the two regions together, in reference either to people of these regions or, more generally, to people deemed to match their uncultured stereotype, and may refer especially to undiscriminating eaters, who by the same token may be judged as greedy or gluttonous. In this respect, the motivation for the metaphor was identified as the voracious feeding habits of goats and sheep and their tendency to overgraze, to the ruination of pasture. As in other Nage usages, the metaphor – or paired metaphors – turns on the similarity of goats and sheep and in this respect contrasts to the biblically derived English metaphor “separating the sheep from the goats” (Matthew 25, 31–46), which of course alludes to a fundamental difference. 74. Goat on one hill, dog on another (hill) ‘Usa sa wolo, lako sa wolo People who speak at cross purposes, someone who misses the point

86

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 87

Figure 5 Goat on a rock (No. 74)

When applied to an individual, the expression describes someone who, misunderstanding what another is saying, starts talking about something else or responds to another topic. The use of two different locations, specifically two different hills, is somewhat reminiscent of the modern English metaphor “not being on the same page,” although the Nage usage further expresses the disparity by reference to two different animals. The combination of “goat” and “dog” reflects the standard composite ‘usa lako, a category of Nage special-purpose classification denoting smaller domestic animals given by wife-takers to wife-givers on various occasions of affinal exchange (Forth 2016, 141).

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

87

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 88

75. Goat on the mountain side ‘Usa zéle lobo Someone or something that distracts a person’s attention Lobo refers to the Ebu Lobo volcano, whose higher slopes, as noted, was formerly home to a population of feral goats (see No. 73). Even so, seeing a goat on a mountainside in Nage territory has probably never been a particularly common experience. In other contexts, zéle lobo (“on the mountain”; where lobo has more the meaning of “peak” or “summit”) somewhat opaquely refers to an impotent man, but this appears irrelevant to the present metaphor. As “goat on the mountain” denotes a distraction or diversion – someone or something that draws one’s attention away from a task or topic of conversation, as the local interpretation has it – it recalls the English metaphor “red herring,” although this can refer more specifically to a deliberate diversion (see Ammer 1989, 228; Palmatier 1995, 319). 76. Goats eating (voraciously) until sunset ‘Usa sepa leza mena People working quickly and continuously to finish a task on time Often used as an exhortation, to encourage a group of people collectively engaged in agricultural labour to complete a task before nightfall, the expression draws on a practice of penning goats in the morning and returning the animals to their pens at sundown. This is done especially in cooler and damper parts of central Nage since, as Nage recognize, goats do not tolerate cold and moisture. Having built up an appetite in the mornings, goats released and taken to pasture after midday will then eat voraciously and without stop until sundown – as one man put it “as if they know that they will be penned again before nightfall.” Mena is the direction to the right of a central point of orientation (Forth 1991), but as this is generally to the west in central Nage, leza mena refers to the direction of the sunset. 77. Goat that enters a village ‘Usa kono bo’a Someone in an unfamiliar place or situation who does not know where to turn

88

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 89

The metaphor apparently reflects borrowing from the Indonesian idiom rusa masuk kampong, “a deer that enters a village” and reflects a misidentification of central Nage ‘usa (rusa in dialects to the northeast), “goat,” and rusa, the term for deer in the national language. One man described the expression as referring to a person who enters a village and speaks forcefully or loudly, but this appears not to be the general understanding (see No. 166). 78. Goat’s whiskers, sideburns Kumi ‘usa Men’s facial hair The usual expression is “having side whiskers, facial hair like a goat” (kumi bhia ko’o kumi ‘usa). At present, kumi is generally understood as equivalent to Indonesian kumis, “moustache,” in which regard one Nage man described the metaphor as curious “because goats do not have moustaches (kumi) but only beards (tébe).” His puzzlement apparently reflects both influence from the national language and changing hair-styles. Growing moustaches but shaving the rest of the face is a modern practice; formerly, when hair above the lip was regarded simply as part of a beard, there seems not to have been any separate word for “moustache.” A term specifying side whiskers or sideburns is accordingly kumi pipi (pipi, “cheek”), and Arndt (1961) glosses Ngadha kumi as “beard, moustache, facial hair.” 79. Male goat mounting a female goat ‘Usa dhoko moka A clumsy person, who bumps or rams into things or other people Moka is a young female animal that is full grown or approaching maturity but has yet to bear offspring. Recorded just once, a regular informant claimed the expression was the correct or original form of ‘usa dhoko moko, “goat jumping on companions” (No. 72), and he identified the motivation as a male goat’s habit, when driven by excessive sexual appetite, of mating in a rambunctious, disorderly way, attempting to mount a female from various directions. Again, however, although the specific zoological source is the sexuality of billy goats, the expression does not refer to sexual behavior in humans, and it is not clear how far it should be treated as a separate metaphor or a variant of ‘usa dhoko

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

89

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 90

moko. (Dhoko is synonymous with gaka, “to mount, mate,” specifically with reference to large mammals or livestock.) 80. Uncastrated goat ‘Usa mona keso An overactive or restless person Also recorded as “(having) a body like an uncastrated goat” (weki bhia ‘usa mona kesi), the expression usually describes people who are never still, who are always getting up, changing place, and moving about, and who thus disturb others. It can also refer to people who regularly change what they are doing or who do not stick to a decision and appear to lack conviction. Although the usage reflects the sexual behaviour of male goats that are still whole, it does not apply specifically or even usually to men who wander about in search of women and, in fact, is one of many phrases Nage parents use when reprimanding boisterous young children. 81. Goat’s beard Tébe ‘ongo A kind of fungus The name is peculiar, as ‘ongo (goat) is the Nage form of rongo, the name for goats in Ngadha and some Lio dialects (see also central Keo longo, western Keo yongo). 82. Goat’s ear Hinga ‘ongo A kind of brownish fungus The fungus is named after its fancied resemblance to a goat’s ear. Regarding ‘ongo see No. 81. 83. Goat testicle lemon Mude ‘ade ‘usa A variety of citrus The plant is so named because the fruit are about the same size as a goat’s testicles (cf. buffalo testicle lemon, No. 28). 90

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 91

DOG • Canis familiaris • LAKO Dogs are among the earliest animals brought to Flores and their significance in Nage life is manifold (Forth 2016, 86–92), so it is hardly surprising that among mammals the dog is the vehicle of the highest number of metaphors (35), exceeding even the water buffalo (33). In regard to relations with and especially treatment by humans, a difference is noticeable between more highly valued hunting dogs and ordinary dogs, but this contrast is not discernible in most Nage dog metaphors. 84. Barking like a dog Gho gho bhia ko’o lako ghogho A person with a harsh voice and who speaks a lot The expression translates more exactly as “to make sounds like a barking dog,” or “to go ‘bow-wow’ (gho gho).” Insofar as it refers not only to a harshvoiced person who speaks often but also such a person who speaks loudly, the usage is comparable to English metaphors like “barking orders” and “barking obscenities.” In English, “barking like a dog” can also describe someone with a loud, persistent cough. 85. Dog adept at climbing, Lako lebi. See Stick horse (No. 49) 86. Dog (and) pig Lako wawi A person who behaves like an animal, in an improper or immoral way Combining the name of a ubiquitous domestic animal and “pig,” which names both wild and domestic swine, lako wawi is a standard binary composite with several senses, the most inclusive being “mammals in general” (Forth 2016, 141). As a metaphor, it further suggests “animals in general.” Recorded instances include the admonition “do not be, behave like dogs [and] pigs” (ma’e bhia lako wawi) and “to have the nature of a dog [and] pig” (ngai zede bhia ko’o lako wawi). As regards this second usage it should be noted that Nage normally consider ngai zede (here glossed as “nature” but also interpretable as “mind”) as a quality exclusive to humans and do not employ the term when speaking of the characteristic ways of non-human animals. In referring metaphorically to animal-like behaviour Nage also employ other standard D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

91

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 92

binary composites conjoining animal names, specifically names of wild animals and nearly all denoting mammals, either in place of or as complements to lako wawi (pig [and] dog). These include: kogha wawi, “deer [and] wild pigs”; kutu bétu, “porcupine [and] Giant rat”; bheku meo, “civet [and] cat”; and ‘o’a ghoa, “monkey [and] monitor lizard” (see further Forth 2016, 140–8). 87. Dog from Labo Lako Labo A wife taken from a distant location or unfamiliar group Labo (or “Lambo”) is a district far to the northeast of central Nage, which, in this context, refers synecdochically to any distant region. The phrase is contained in a longer aphoristic expression, “purchase a dog from Labo and gunpowder will be wasted; command it to go home and it will run seawards (that is, in the opposite direction),” beta lako Labo tau loja ao, zuba nai nuka pau so (or dua) lau. Usually sung while circle-dancing, the phrases are a warning of the dangers of marrying a woman from a distant place or from a relatively unknown group as she may prove not to perform wifely duties properly. Nage commentators interpreted “wasted gunpowder” as bridewealth that is expended in vain, in which respect it is noteworthy that taking a wife from an unrelated group typically requires a higher bridewealth. As Labo is seaward (lau) of central Nage, pau so lau refers to the wife running home to her parents. Although interpretable as a synecdoche, “Labo” is probably further motivated by its assonance with lako (dog). Although dogs are one of the animals included in bridewealth (and thus given in exchange for wives), women are not generally identified symbolically with dogs, and in this context “dog” is evidently chosen as an animal trained to follow its owner’s commands. As Nage pointed out, dogs, and especially adult dogs, purchased from distant places or unfamiliar people may not have been well trained. 88. Dog has carried (something) away, carried away by a dog Lako padho A person inspired to do wrong, someone who is led astray The metaphor occurs as one of a pair of parallel phrases, polo péte, lako padho, “a witch has pointed the way; a dog has carried (something) away,” or “di-

92

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 93

rected by a witch, carried off by a dog.” The referent is someone who is influenced by others to commit wrong-doing, and the phrase is often used when admonishing another person not to follow the speaker’s example in reference to behaviour he or she now regrets. According to Nage, the metaphor derives from a dog’s habit of picking up things with its mouth and dropping or depositing these some distance away. It is the person influenced by negative forces – or (as one might say in English) led astray – who is thus described as being “carried off ” by a dog.” The parallelism of “witch” and “dog” in the longer expression may reflect a wider association of dogs and witches (polo), a connection consistent with the animal’s quasi-human status (Forth 2016, 88–90). At the same time, Nage identify witches with animals in general (Forth 1993; Forth 1998; Forth 2007a), and witches are not especially associated with dogs in the way European witches are associated with cats. In addition, the reference to a “witch” in the longer expression is equally figurative. A person exerting such negative influence is not actually identified as a witch, and the expression does not constitute an accusation of witchcraft, even indirectly. 89. Dog hiding at the edge of a path Lako buni dhi zala A person unable to conceal a meaning or intention A more complete form of the expression is pata bhia lako buni dhi zala, describing what a person says (pata) as “being like a dog hiding at the edge of a path.” Nage understand the phrase as referring more specifically to a dog sticking its head into vegetation growing beside a path – as dogs often do, when looking or sniffing for something – so that most of its body remains visible. The human referent, therefore, is someone who deliberately speaks unclearly or opaquely but nevertheless fails to conceal something that is evident to interlocutors or of which they are already aware. 90. Dog in need of a bone Lako no’a toko A person who keeps requesting something and persists even after several refusals No’a means “to require or want something (urgently),” like a small child who wants to be suckled or fed (to cite an example given by one commentator).

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

93

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 94

However, in this metaphor the word may partly be understood as involving a pun on noa, “to howl, wail” – as dogs also characteristically do. And it is interesting that, when applied to humans, noa refers especially to the crying or wailing of small children who, as in the above illustration, may vocalize in this way owing to hunger. 91. Dog mounting a buffalo Lako saka bhada A man of low rank who marries or cohabits with a woman of higher rank See “buffalo mounting a dog” (No. 10), describing the opposite relationship. Especially in the traditional society, the relationship is less likely to involve regular cohabitation and, thus, more likely to be less public or more clandestine than where a union involves a high-ranking man and a low-ranking woman. 92. Dog on another hill, Lako sa wolo. See Goat on one hill (No. 74) 93. Dog pissing at the edge of a path Lako suka dhi zala A person who does something inconstantly and ineffectually The metaphor refers more specifically to someone who begins something but is regularly distracted by other matters, keeps stopping to do other things, or does not proceed directly to a destination. As a result, the objective is not quickly achieved nor a task easily completed. Nage identify the motivation as the habit of dogs, as they go along, regularly stopping to urinate. A less explicit variant is lako suka téki, “dog that lifts its leg to urinate.” The expression is reminiscent of the English idiom “to piss about,” which appears to have much the same human referent although not clearly the same motivation. 94. Dog rubbing its arse Lako ‘oco ‘obo A person who does not remain long in a single place, who moves from house to house, or cannot sit still and keeps shifting about

94

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 95

The motivation of this metaphor is the practice of dogs rubbing their backsides on the ground or a house floor in order to relieve itching. Nage say dogs will do this in response to worm infestation, in which regard the action draws some sympathy. However, there is also an idea that the canine behaviour is inauspicious (pie) when it occurs close to where people regularly sit, in which case it should be counteracted or prevented by pouring lime on the spot. 95. Dog snatching coconut dregs Lako ca’o pe’a A person who misinterprets what one is saying People thus described might misinterpret or fail to understand other people’s statements because they do not listen properly or do not fully hear the speaker out. They therefore form an interpretation too hastily and “jump” to the wrong conclusion. The source of the metaphor is a dog catching coconut dregs in its jaws when a cook (usually a woman) throws these away after grating and squeezing out the flesh of the nut to extract the cream. As coconut cream is a common ingredient in Nage cooking, grating coconuts and squeezing the flesh are early stages of meal preparation. Although no commentator mentioned this, it would therefore seem that anyone, or any creature, who caught and consumed the dregs – matter of little worth – would not only be ingesting an inferior food but would, as it were, also be eating too hastily, long before the complete meal was fully prepared. Hence it is reasonable to surmise that, in this metaphor, consuming dregs, as a symbol of too hastily and thus improperly interpreting a person’s words, operates in implicit contrast to consuming a fully cooked meal. On the other hand, the contrast may simply be between discarded scraps and the complete meal, where the latter stands for the full statement that is neither heard nor properly comprehended. 96. Dog that bites everyone it encounters Lako kiki papa tuli A person angry with many people Tuli means “to drop in (on someone)” or “to stop by,” while commentators glossed papa tuli as “going to visit someone but dropping in on others along the way.” As papa can mean “side, direction,” here it may have the sense of

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

95

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 96

“on all sides.” Describing a dog that bites one victim after another, the metaphor refers to someone who is rightfully angry with a particular person but, unreasonably, vents anger on everyone he or she comes across. 97. Dog that falls together with the mortar Lako boka toto ngesu A childless person or couple Mortars are used to pound rice and maize, and when a residue of food remains inside, an unwatched dog may climb onto or into a mortar to lap this up. In the scenario described, however, the animal succeeds only in knocking the mortar over and falling with it. Although Nage never commented on the motivation, I suspect the metaphor entails sexual imagery, wherein either the hungry dog and the mortar both evoke the male penis (since both fail to remain standing) or the mortar represents the female genitalia. In other words, the expression may imply failure to engage in fertile intercourse. 98. Dog that is tame with everyone Lako tolo mau A compliant or extremely (or excessively) obliging person The metaphor is employed in at least two similar ways. It can refer to people who are friendly with everyone they meet in order to obtain favourable treatment or something they want or, alternatively, to people with little will or mind of their own who always do what others ask – including women who freely engage in sex with any interested male. Applied mostly to animals, mau means “tame” in regard to specimens of feral animals (e.g., buffalo or cattle) that are tamed for domestic use and ultimately for sale or slaughter, or to wild animals kept as pets. 99. Dog tooth Usu lako Human canine teeth As “canine” is “dog, doglike,” this is identical to the English metaphor. However, English “canine” can refer to the corresponding teeth in a variety of animals, whereas Nage employ usu lako only for humans – and of course dogs.

96

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 97

Interestingly, with reference to porcupines the same term refers to the animal’s quills, its primary defensive equipment and in this respect comparable to a dog’s canines. 100. Dog waiting for bones Lako no toko Someone who remains still, does not take action No in this context means “to wait, remain still” or, more specifically, “to wait in anticipation (of something)”; other meanings include “to coax or persuade” and “angry, annoyed” (probably a homonym). The phrase describes the manner of dogs, especially favoured dogs allowed inside houses, that typically wait patiently for humans eating meat to toss them scraps. In one instance, the metaphor was applied to a creditor waiting to be repaid, and in a similar vein it can refer to visitors who linger and stay beyond their time. But the more general reference is any situation in which a person might be expected to take action or respond to something but in fact does nothing. The metaphor does not definitely refer to patience as a positive human quality. 101. Dogs and cats Lako ne’e meo People who characteristically do not get along and are inclined to quarrel The phrase is virtually identical to English “cats and dogs” in the phrase “to fight like cats and dogs.” It reflects, of course, people’s experience of the mutual dislike that characterizes these two animals that commonly come into contact and sometimes conflict in or near dwellings. As a standard composite, lako meo (or sometimes meo lako) refers to animals that have regular access to the inside of houses – for example, in regard to the requirement that, when a corpse awaits burial inside a house, special care should be taken to ensure that no animal jumps over it (Forth and Kukharenko 2012). 102. Dogs barking at a monkey Lako ghogho ’o’a A number of people speaking against or angry with an individual

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

97

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 98

The specific source of this metaphor is a treed macaque pursued by a pack of hunting dogs. 103. Downstream dog Lako lau An undependable or unpredictable person The usage is generally comparable to “dog from Labo” (No. 87). It occurs in two longer expressions – be’o mau lako lau, “beware the tameness of downstream dogs,” and podi mau lako lau, “pretending to be tame (like a) downstream dog” – both of which suggest prosodic effects. Mau is “tame,” while lau (downstream, seaward) refers to any relatively distant place. As Nage explain, motivating the metaphor is the possibility that a dog acquired from a far away village, although it appears tame and even if it has lived with the new owner for some time, might yet suddenly run away and return to its original owner. In a specific interpretation, the expression refers to a woman who appears “tame,” or well-behaved, at home but misbehaves sexually when she is elsewhere. According to Nage, this is a danger in marrying women whose background is not well known. 104. Howling dog Lako ta’a noa A child who cries loudly and incessantly Often uttered in exasperation and employed in chastising noisy children, “like a howling (or wailing) dog” (bhia lako ta’a noa) is one of several metaphors referring to animal sounds that Nage employ for children crying. As applied to human vocalizations, English “howl” is a comparable usage. Among Nage, however, dogs howling are a death omen, so that children making such a noise may be experienced as particularly disturbing. 105. Hunting dog Lako ngeli Someone distinguished by special qualities or abilities, a superior person The metaphor is alternatively expressed as “descendant of a hunting dog” (dhi lako ngeli) and implicitly involves the previously mentioned contrast be-

98

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 99

tween hunting dogs and non-hunters. Hunting dogs of course possess valued skills that other dogs do not and so are accorded special treatment (Forth 2016, 86–9). 106. Manner of dogs Sa lako The canine position Denoting a human sexual position, the metaphor differs not at all from English “canine position.”

Figure 6 Newly acquired dog, chained (No. 103)

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

99

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 100

107. Nage dog Lako Nage A man with an excessive sexual appetite or one who is adept at persuading women to have sex The phrase refers to Nage men in general, especially when alluding to a particular reputation bound up with a traditional practice of engaging in non-marital (pre- or extra-marital) affairs (Forth 2004b). One commentator thus identified the source of the metaphor as “(male) dogs seeking intercourse” (lako ta’a cu). Relating more specifically to men in the vicinity of Bo’a Wae, the main village in central Nage, the reputation is sometimes advertised by Nage men themselves, and often with some self-satisfaction or pride. I once asked a man whether it was true, as I had heard, that he had two “wives” – that is, that he simultaneously cohabited with two women (or had done so until recently, before one had left him). He confessed to this, adding with a grin, “you know us Nage dogs.” During my most recent visit to Flores in 2018, I heard that young men in central Nage sometimes formed named “gangs” – evidently a modern phenomenon – and that one of these calls itself “Lako Nage.” The Nage usage exemplifies an apparently widespread association of dogs, and not just male dogs (see English “bitch” and “dog in heat”), with sexuality or strong sexual desire. Examples from American English are mentioned in chapter 2. On the other hand, it is possible that the Nage metaphor also draws on the use of dogs in hunting, where they run down and attack game animals (notably deer and pigs). Nage versions of the conceptual metaphors “sexual exploits = hunting” and “women = game animals” are further discussed below, in reference to one of the pig metaphors (No. 125). 108. Swarmed by barking dogs Lako ghogho gheo A person of whom many requests are made or against whom many claims are laid “Barking dogs” refers to the many people who place demands on a person. Despite its generally negative implication, as one commentator pointed out the expression can have a partly positive sense, referring to someone who is much in demand or who bears many responsibilities.

100

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 101

109. Waist like a dog shitting ‘Ége bhia ko’o lako ta’i A person bending over to lift a heavy object As Nage remarked, someone thus engaged is likely to strain at the waist and so in this respect resembles a defecating dog. Addressed to the person lifting, the expression is usually uttered in jest. 110. Sky dog Lako lizu Mole-cricket; night-heron This is a folk taxonomic name with two distinct referents. In regard to the mole-cricket, an insect belonging to the Gryllotalpidae and the more usual referent in central Nage, a comparable metaphoric name is Indonesian anjing tanah (“earth dog”), denoting the same creature. In both languages, “dog” apparently refers to the mole-cricket’s habit of burrowing, or digging holes in the earth. As applied to the night-heron Nycticorax sp. the term alludes to the bird’s harsh cry, resembling the barking of a dog and often heard at night. (Translating as “night raven,” Latin Nycticorax reflects a further resemblance of the heron’s cries to the croaking of a raven.) Identified as “sky dog,” the nocturnal vocalization of the night-heron heard around October is one of a number of chronological signs indicating the onset of the rainy season. Thus when they hear the bird’s cries, Nage say “sky dog looks after the rain” (lako lizu léghu ae uza, Forth 2004a, 12). In this context, the cries are further identified with another bird, the white-breasted waterhen, which is otherwise named kuku raku (see Nos. 416, 417). 111. Surveying dog Lako lao A kind of mantis This is another folk taxonomic name. Lao means “to inspect, check on, look over,” as in lao tana watu, “to look over, survey an area of land or cultivated field,” and lao ana wa, “to check on (domestic) animals, livestock.” But how exactly this pertains to the insect is uncertain.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

101

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 102

112. Dog chest plant Uta kasa lako A parasitic plant An unidentified plant described as growing on tree trunks. Uta is “vegetable, herb.” 113. Dog ginger Lea lako A kind of ginger plant This is one of three kinds of ginger distinguished by animal names (see Nos. 26, 290). By contrast to these other varieties, only the leaves are eaten and not the root. Whether this distinction motivates the name is unclear. 114. Dog’s tail Éko lako A kind of plant A lowland plant with very small flowers, the fruit (which are not eaten) resemble a dog’s tail. For eastern Ngadha, Verheijen (1990) gives the same phrase as the name of Mallotus ricinoides, and for the So’a language, Macaranga sp. 115. Dog’s urine, dog urinating Suka lako A kind of tree This is a tree whose fruit children like to squeeze; the fruit then squirts a small amount of juice reminiscent of the small amount of urine dogs emit whenever they urinate. The tree’s name thus reflects the same motivation as “dog pissing at the edge of a path” (No. 93) and does not refer to the colour or smell of the juice or any part of the tree. 116. Dog’s “elbow” Ciku lako Wood that is bent or warped

102

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 103

Referring also to the human elbow, ciku applies to the heel of a dog’s hind leg. The usage is reminiscent of the English metaphor “bent (or crooked) as a dog’s hind leg,” although the referent of this phrase is usually not physical. 117. Dog’s tongue Lema lako A length of cloth left hanging down from the centre of the abdomen when a man’s waistcloth (or sarong, a sort of tubular skirt) is folded around the body and tucked in at the waist That the tongue hangs from the mouth more often in canines than in other animals explains why the dog in particular provides the vehicle for this metaphor. 118. Sitting dog (hut) (Kéka) lako ngabe A kind of building A structure used for storage or as a temporary shelter (e.g., when guarding fields), constructed of two front posts and two shorter back posts, thus with a diagonal thatched roof sloping towards the back and reminiscent of a dog sitting on its hind legs.

PIG • Sus spp. • WAWI Wawi names both domestic and wild pigs, and Nage regard these (correctly, in an international scientific view) as essentially the same animal and as able to mate and interbreed (Forth 2016, 92–8). Accordingly, the following includes metaphors whose vehicle is either the wild or domestic animal, with the distinction, where relevant, being noted in individual commentaries. In view of the value pigs of both sorts hold for Nage – as major sacrificial animals and as counter-gift given in exchange for bridewealth in the case of domestic swine, and as a major game animal in the case of wild pigs – the number of pig metaphors is perhaps fewer than might be expected. Although twenty-five metaphors are recorded below, just sixteen refer to humans or

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

103

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 104

human behaviour (or in one case, a human body part), the others designating animals, plants, and objects. Several metaphorical uses of the pig – including “stupid as a pig” – have much in common with English pig metaphors (see especially Lawrence 1993). Not always does this amount to a complete identity, yet in view of differences between the role of pigs in Nage and anglophone culture, these similarities are striking and tend to suggest that cross-culturally similar metaphors can be motivated by inherent qualities of pigs as much as by, and sometimes more than, similar socio-economic or cultural values. At the same time, it is noteworthy that, unlike Westerners, Nage do not depict pigs as especially dirty animals, a status arguably accorded more to sheep (see Nos. 66, 67), and the only pig metaphor that mentions faeces (No. 131) – ironically in a crosscultural perspective – actually refers to human excrement. 119. Child of a village (domestic) pig, domestic piglet Ana wawi bo’a A man’s legitimate child Contrasting with “child of a wild pig” (No. 120), the metaphor is synonymous with ana au lewu, “children beneath the (raised) house, housefloor” – a place where, traditionally, domestic pigs were in fact often found. Like other metaphors (e.g. Nos. 71, 129) the expression reflects a general Nage representation of licit and illicit sex, or sex inside and outside marriage, as being prosecuted, respectively inside and outside dwellings or settlements. 120. Child of a wild pig, wild piglet Ana wawi witu An illegitimate child, child born outside of a recognized marriage Such children are more directly designated as ana loza, literally a “child of wandering (loza, ‘to travel, travel about without any definite destination or purpose’),” an expression alluding to the relationship between the child and the father (the “wanderer”). The same applies to the present metaphor, the interpretation of which thus agrees with the use of “wild pig” (No. 134) for a man who travels far and wide. A modern expression for an illegitimate child is “aeroplane child” (ana kapa co), although this may allude more often to women than to men who travel by air.

104

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 105

121. Dog (and) pig. See Lako wawi (No. 86) 122. Fat as a large pig Hume bhia wawi méze A fat, large-bodied man or woman Also expressed as having “a body like a large pig” (weki bhia ko wawi méze), the phrase is obviously comparable to English “fat as a pig.” On the other hand, it is not nearly as negative as the English metaphor – nor, indeed, is being “fat” (hume). In fact, so long as a person is not decidedly obese, hume among Nage often denotes a relatively positive quality, especially when applied to growing children. Although a person can be considered too fat, describing someone as “fat as a large pig” can accordingly be said in jest, or light-heartedly, and is not necessarily considered insulting. 123. Give birth like pigs, hatch chicks like hens Dhadhi bhia wawi, mesa bhia manu Bear many children Having many children is something Nage generally desire, and the phrase is thus employed in requests contained in speeches of offering addressed to beneficent spiritual beings. Although these do not include animal names, the same desire, and moreover the same complementary pairing of “pig” and “chicken,” is expressed in the ritual usages dhadhi bi, mesa kapa, “give birth prolifically, hatch in abundance” (applied to trees and other plants, kapa means “thick, dense”), and peni bi, wesi méze, “feed (poultry) so they multiply, feed (pigs) so they grow large” (see further Forth 2016, 66, 142) – phrases that not only express a request for abundant livestock but also for numerous children. In all these expressions, the pairing of pigs and chickens reflects the fact that these are the major domesticates kept and fed inside villages, where their care falls largely to women. 124. Like a pig Bhia ko’o wawi wawi A lazy, indolent person, who sleeps a great deal, or a greedy person

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

105

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 106

Referring specifically to a domestic pig and usually expressed as a simile, the combination of indolence (sleeping a great deal) and greed (eating a great deal) appears crucial to this metaphor, as it does to counterparts in English. Here as elsewhere, reduplication of the animal name (wawi wawi) renders a general, collective, or categorical sense rather than the literal plural, and in fact one can also say bhia ko’o wawi. On the other hand, a regular commentator claimed that one could not or should not simply say “like a pig”; rather, a speaker must specify ka bhia ko’o wawi, “to eat like a pig” – thus specifying greed rather than indolence – or bodo bhia ko’o wawi, specifying stupidity or obduracy (No. 132). 125. Pig in a vale of tui trees is struck by a blowpipe dart, hurrying to feed on Arenga palm dates falls down head first Wawi hobo tui gena ana supi, ‘aba pe wole boba tobhe ‘obhe A woman who is forward with men and in consequence becomes engaged in sex Lyrics to a circle-dance song usually performed in connection with annual pugilistic competitions (etu), the phrases, addressed by men to women, provide another example of the genre named pata néke, and, as is typical of this genre, the component metaphors have a definite sexual import. As all commentators recognized, the “pig” is a woman while the “blowpipe dart” is the male penis. “Hurrying in search of dates” is less clear but refers to an action of the “pig,” who, apparently in consequence of her desire to consume the edible fruit of the Arenga palm, is described not just as falling down but as falling on her face with her buttocks and genitalia exposed and sticking in the air. One commentator expressly identified the Arenga dates as a reference to a man or men. It may be no coincidence that, at the male pugilistic competitions where the refrain is sung, men drink copious amounts of toddy tapped from the trees that provide the dates. Moreover, the competitions, always held during the dry months from June to August, are recognized as a time of sexual licence, when young unmarried people (as well as some already married) seek out members of the opposite sex. As I discovered no definite significance for “vale of tui trees,” this specification appears motivated primarily by the assonance of tui and supi. Assonance is further evident in the combination of wole, tobhe, and ‘obhe. As is often the case in songs, central

106

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 107

Figure 7 Sow with piglets (No. 123)

Nage ‘aba and ‘obhe are frequently rendered as raba and robhe, thus pronouncing the /r/ that has been lost in this dialect but is retained elsewhere. In view of the identification of the penis with a blowpipe dart, the foregoing expression reveals the conceptual metaphors “sexual exploits = hunting” and “women = game animals.” Though not explicitly an animal metaphor, these find further expression in the Nage phrase zapa tuba, “to try out (one’s) spear,” referring especially to a youth’s first sexual encounter after undergoing the rite of “circumcision” (gedho loza). Here tuba, denoting a hunting spear, refers of course to the penis. Whether the metaphor implicates any particular kind of game animal is unclear. However, a comparable Sumbanese usage involves asking male adolescents, before they are circumcised, “how many pigs have you speared” (Forth 1981, 161), an idiom that obviously equates women with pigs. 126. Pig sitting on its hind quarters Wawi seze péga A person in a desperate situation bravely awaiting whatever fate befalls him

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

107

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 108

The phrase refers to a wild pig, usually a boar, that hunters have run to a state of exhaustion and that simply sits waiting for the dogs to attack, ready to strike back with snout and tusks and fight to the bitter end. Nage remark how pigs in such a state typically sit on their hind quarters after the manner of a dog or cat. 127. Pig slaughtered off-centre (ineptly) (Bhia) Wawi wela ghébhi A shrieking child, anyone who screams noisily and incessantly Nage slaughter pigs by striking them vertically with a parang in the centre of the head, from just above the snout to the nape (see figure 8). This should kill the animal instantly. If the strike is off centre, the pig will survive the blow and begin squealing (fi) loudly. 128. Pig’s nose Izu wawi Heel of the (human) foot The usage was explained as reflecting the fact that an adult’s heel (at least among traditionally bare-foot Nage) is hard and, unlike the softer toe end of the foot, can be used to break soil. Similarly a pig uses its nose, or snout, to root in the ground. 129. Pigs rooting in vines, Wawi koba. See Goats in undergrowth (No. 71) 130. Pigs wallow, Wawi jola. See Deer bathe (No. 163) 131. Shit (faeces) on a pig’s head Ta’i ulu wawi A despicable person A general deprecation, the expression draws on the traditional Nage practice of defecating on the ground, especially on a slope just outside the bounds of a village, in a designated place exposed to domestic pigs. The pigs would then consume the faeces, but sometimes a pig would come too close to the defe-

108

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 109

Figure 8 Slaughtering pigs in the traditional manner (No. 127)

cator, so that faeces would fall on the animal’s head. While not explicitly depicting pigs as dirty animals, like English idioms the expression nevertheless reveals some association of pigs with dirt. Recently, the practices enabling this metaphor have changed. Partly following government directives, most Nage nowadays employ enclosed latrines to which domestic animals have far less access, and pigs are usually tethered or penned. Still, the memory of former ways remains strong enough to make the image meaningful. 132. Stupid, ignorant like a pig Bodo bhia ko’o wawi A stupid or obstinate person Somewhat like the familiar English animal metaphor “pig ignorant,” bodo does not mean inherently unintelligent or dull-witted but has more the sense

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

109

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 110

of “slow to respond” and “obtuse,” including “deliberately obtuse’ – or “pigheaded” – as well as “ignorant” in the informal sense of “coarse, ill-mannered.” As Nage themselves recognize, bodo is semantically distinct from other words translatable as “stupid,” such as dhozo and jinga, which refer more to apparent mental incapacity or dull-wittedness. Although some commentators suggested the word may reflect borrowing from Indonesian bodoh, bodok (“stupid, dull-witted,” also “ignorant” and “indifferent”), this is unlikely, especially as older Nage affirmed that bodo has always been used in the expression. Also, bodo occurs in the western Keo variant bodo bhila wawi, though the Lio version, bongo ngére wawi (cf. Ngadha bongo ngongo ro, “extremely stupid,” Arndt 1961) employs a different term. Although the metaphor applies mainly or specifically to domestic rather than wild pigs, which Nage regard as mentally capable adversaries in the hunt, Nage discourse on pigs provides no evidence that they consider pigs as generally less intelligent than other animals, a point they sometimes made explicitly. This would seem to confirm that bodo does not simply mean “lacking in intelligence” and, additionally, that the metaphor is informed by other qualities of pigs, and specifically domestic pigs – for example, their apparent indolence – as much as by any imputed lack of mental ability. 133. Take back the pig meat Weda walo poza wawi Taking a wife from an established wife-taker According to their system of asymmetric marriage alliance, Nage should give pigs or serve pork only to parties that take wives, or have done so in the past. Accordingly, on occasions when affines formally meet, wife-takers can receive and consume only pork, while pork is prohibited to wife-givers, who then consume other kinds of meat, provided by wife-givers. Pigs and pork therefore “move” in the same direction as women; thus, to take a bride from a wife-taker is to take back something that has previously been given, thereby initiating an illicit direct exchange between two groups and confusing the distinction of “wife-givers” (moi ga’e) and “wife-takers” (ana weta). Instead of weda, “pull (out), retract,” one also hears ala, “to take.” A synonymous phrase for a direct exchange of women is tu bhei bhole soge wawi, “to stick a carrying pole through the legs of a tethered pig.” This

110

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 111

is less explicit but, according to general usage, expresses essentially the same idea, although it more specifically conveys the image of preparing to carry a pig to a wife-giver, a party that should be giving pigs to the carriers. Nage always tether the legs, especially of pigs given to another for slaughter, and then carry the animal upside down on a bamboo or wooden pole. (The number of men required to carry the pole is therefore used as a measure of the size of the pig given.) 134. Wild pig Wawi witu A man who is always moving around and therefore difficult to locate Motivating this metaphor, Nage note, is the ability of wild pig herds to cover a large territory in a short time and their habit of never remaining long in a single place. Denoting a negative behaviour, the phrase is sometimes applied in exasperation to a man one wants to meet but who is frequently not at home or in another place where one would expect to find him. “Wild pig” seems to be used only for men and never for women, partly because women are not nearly as mobile as men. 135. Pig cricket Cico wawi A smaller kind of cricket This is a folk taxonomic name contrasting to “buffalo cricket” (No. 21). Comparison with Nos. 136 and 137 suggests that factors other than the insect’s relatively small size, conceived by analogy to pigs and buffalo, may inform the metaphorical name. 136. Pig prawn Kuza wawi A kind of freshwater prawn A folk taxonomic term. Nage analyze the name as referring to the crustacean’s dark skin and somewhat humped back, both described as features also found in pigs.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

111

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 112

137. Pig wasp Fua wawi A kind of wasp A folk taxonomic that, according to commentators, may be motivated either by the wasp’s generally dark colour, similar to the dark skin and black hair of the majority of local pigs, or by its high-pitched sound, which resembles the squeal of a pig (Forth 2016, 251). 138. Wala pig Wawi wala A kind of spider, reputedly poisonous No one I questioned could say why “pig” (wawi) should appear in the spider’s name (see further Forth 2016, 338). Formally, the name is comparable to two names incorporating “dog” as the nominal element (Nos. 110, 111) and another two, also denoting arachnids, which incorporate “cat” (Nos. 157, 158). 139. Pig ‘abu ‘Abu wawi A kind of grass So named because it is eaten by pigs, the grass differs from a common sort called simply ‘abu. Verheijen (1990, 36) lists the So’a cognate rabu wawi as Cyperus (a genus of tropical sedges). 140. Pig’s saliva Lua wawi A kind of vine The plant is described as exuding a foamy liquid that recalls the saliva (ae lua) of a pig. Verheijen (1990, 37) gives an apparent eastern Ngadha cognate, rura wawi, as Cissus, a genus of woody vines. 141. Pig shit leaves Wunu ta’i wawi A kind of plant

112

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 113

This may be the plant called by the same name in some Lio dialects, which Verheijen (1990, 76) identifies as a species of Vernonia, a large genus of shrubs, some with edible leaves (Nage wunu). Nage informants disagreed as to whether the leaves of this particular plant could be eaten. 142. Pig bag Be wawi Large sort of men’s shoulder bag According to Nage, the bags are so named because a small pig would fit inside. Contributing to the term’s metaphorical character, such bags are not in fact used for carrying piglets, or at least not regularly, and on several occasions I noticed that Nage found the name humorous. 143. Red pig Wawi to Antares Although most Nage pigs are “black” (mite), some are of a colour classified as “red” (to). Located in the constellation Scorpius, the bright red star Antares stands opposite the constellation of the Pleiades (Ko, also denoting a net or net bag); thus, one rises only after the other has set and the two are never seen together in the night sky. As in other parts of Indonesia, Nage observe the positions of the stars in gauging the passage of the year and organizing agricultural and other activities, including the annual ritual hunt of pigs and deer. Like other eastern Indonesians, Nage also recount a myth relating how the two stars, often represented as an incestuous brother-sister pair, came to be permanently separated. Accordingly, Nage describe two people who always avoid one another, so that when one arrives in a place the other immediately leaves, as being “like the Pleiades and the Red pig” (bhia Ko ne’e Wawi To).

CAT • Felis catus • MEO, NGO NGOE Listed below are metaphors referring to both domestic and wild cats. By all available indications, cats were introduced quite recently to Flores, perhaps little more than 200 or 250 years ago. But despite the animal’s recent introduction,

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

113

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 114

Nage cat metaphors are relatively numerous. So too are other symbolic usages pertaining to cats (Forth 2016, 102–4), and it may be relevant in both respects that, owing in part to their value as mousers, cats are the one animal allowed free access to Nage houses. Wild or feral cats are distinguished as meo witu (“forest cats”), but nearly all metaphors mention only meo (“cat” or “domestic cat,” sometimes specified as meo bo’a, “village cat”). The one exception is ngo ngoe, referring to a particular kind of wild cat (No. 155). 144. Bent like a cat’s tail Léko bhia éko meo A dishonest person, someone who is not “straight” Sometimes expressed as an admonition “do not bend (be bent) like a cat’s tail” or “let us not speak like a cat’s bent tail,” the metaphor reflects the bent or “knotty” tails of many village cats (see figure 9), supplemented by the recognized contrast with the straight or straighter tail of Palm civets (No. 206), the vehicle for the opposite human quality. Even when cats have relatively straight tails, Nage say, these always turn up a little at the end. The expression obviously involves the same metaphor as English “straight” and “bent” (or “crooked”) as references to moral character – a conceptual metaphor that would seem to have a worldwide occurrence (Kövecses 2010). Also involving the body part of an animal, a more specific parallel is found in the English expression “bent (or crooked) as a dog’s hind leg.” 145. Cat biting its own tail Meo kiki éko A person who makes accusations against members of his or her own family; someone with a loud voice, a noisy person In the first sense, the metaphor also occurs in Keo, on Flores’s south central coast, where it refers to conflict or fighting within a group (Tule 1998). How such infighting is comparable to an animal biting its own tail requires no further comment. In the second sense, the term is used to describe small children whose crying or screaming is compared to caterwauling. Indeed, many Nage appear to understand meo kiki éko as referring only or mostly to the harsh, high-pitched, often drawn out, uncanny and disturbing vocalization

114

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 115

Figure 9 Cat with a bent tail (No. 144)

cats sometimes make, usually at night, and this they regularly identify as the sound of cats, or specifically a male cat, mating. Whereas this interpretation appears empirically well grounded, the phenomenon is further associated with witches. But this association plays no obvious part in the metaphor or its motivation.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

115

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 116

146. Cat burying its faeces Meo kamo ta’i A person who conceals wrong-doing The metaphor finds its motivation in an obvious and distinctive behaviour of cats. Here, “faeces” (ta’i) stands for anything negative that a person wishes to hide from others. 147. Cat evading (or fooling) dogs Meo do’o lako A person who is skilled at avoiding others or someone whom it is difficult to hold to a commitment Nage identify the source of the metaphor as a cat’s agility and ability to escape from adversaries with evasive movements and quick changes of position. As an example of “a cat evading a dog” one commentator cited a woman who, being pursued by a particular man, always manages to be absent when he comes looking for her. In this case, the woman was the “cat,” and the man the “dog.” But the expression can also be applied to a man. 148. Cat from Geo Meo Geo A pugilist given to scratching with the fingernails The expression alludes to a manner of fighting in etu (pugilistic competitions) reputedly characteristic of men of Geo (Géro) and surrounding regions, including Réndu and Dhére-Isa, who are reputed to let their fingernails grow for this purpose. Nage remark how this renders them especially dangerous opponents, and included in chants that accompany pugilistic bouts is the warning “beware the Geo cats” (be’o be’o meo Geo). Referring to a broader region to the northeast of Nage, Geo in this context is a synecdoche and, as Nage commentators themselves remarked, is selected because it rhymes with meo. Why cats are used to refer to people who use their nails as weapons is obvious; at the same time, the face of a competitor severely scratched in etu can be described as “looking like it has been torn by a civet” (ngia bhia bheku sasi; see No. 204). Men called Meo Geo are more specifically described as scratching

116

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 117

opponents’ faces with the left hand while the right holds the kepo, a sort of cosh made of buffalo hide and twine. It is only with the kepo that pugilists can legitimately strike an opponent and draw blood. (Drawing blood is a specific object of the competitions, and once a competitor starts to bleed, however slightly, the bout is ended.) As used by others, the metaphor “Geo cat” thus expresses criticism, but it is also used self-referentially. In 2017 I observed a mini-bus owned and operated by a Geo man who had named it “Meo Geo.” (In Flores, as elsewhere in Indonesia, all such vehicles have proper names.) A comparable metaphor referring to male inhabitants of an entire region is “Réndu monkey” (No. 236). 149. Cat gripping a chicken in its jaws Meo seme manu A person with a horrible, fiendish, or malicious facial expression, or someone who temporarily presents such an appearance Usually expressed as “a face like a cat gripping a chicken,” the metaphor derives from a cat’s habit of killing fowls, especially when insufficiently fed by its owners. As Nage remarked, cats look terrifying in this circumstance because their canines become exposed, and as one commentator remarked, the metaphor can accordingly describe, more specifically, someone with a “broad, ugly mouth.” Nage otherwise regard cats as physically attractive animals, yet, as anyone familiar with cats will likely agree, in respect to their teeth and claws cats present a savage aspect and hence display an uncanny ability of appearing pretty and evil-looking at the same time. The metaphor is one of many that can be used in derisive banter and thus applied to people who in fact do not particularly display the features alluded to. 150. Cat that conceals its claws Meo ta’a zoko kungu Someone who keeps malicious intentions hidden, a treacherous person The metaphor hardly requires comment. Cats are the only animals known to Nage with fully retractable claws. One man thought the expression may be a loan translation from a synonymous Indonesian national language phrase (kucing sembunyi kuku), but considering the obvious parallel between

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

117

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 118

hidden intentions and retracted claws, independent development is equally likely. In regard to human applications, the phrase is comparable to English “snake in the grass.” 151. Cat that moves its kittens Meo ta’a dhada ana Someone who disturbs or upsets an established arrangement Motivating this metaphor is the habit of mother cats moving their kittens from one spot to another. Nage say cats will move their litters seven times before settling on the seventh. (Including the spot where the cat delivered, this might imply occupation of eight different locations, the number eight for Nage symbolizing completion.) According to a specific interpretation, the phrase refers especially to a man who keeps moving his family about and who seemingly cannot decide where to live. 152. Cat’s face Ngia meo A frightening or dirty (human) face Usually phrased as “having a face like a cat” (bhia ngia meo), the metaphor is applied in two ways: to a face, especially a child’s, that is smeared with dirt and so superficially resembles the face of a cat with variegated pelage (marked with streaks, spots, or blotches), and to a person whose face or expression is terrifying or suggests ill will. In the second application, it can be understood as an abbreviated form of No. 149. 153. Cat’s waist ‘Ége meo A person skilled in evasion or avoiding things In a particular interpretation, the metaphor was described as applying to “slippery” people, clever at escaping blame or who, while appearing to be at fault, are always able to excuse themselves. Usually expressed as bhia ‘ége meo, “having a waist like a cat,” the usage derives from cats’ flexibility and their ability to enter narrow places, bend their bodies, and quickly turn or change

118

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 119

direction (cf. No. 147). In this respect, the cat evidently takes the place of the weasel in English metaphor, where “weasel,” the name of a similarly lithe and agile creature, describes an untrustworthy person, able to “get out,” or indeed “weasel out,” of things. There are no weasels or any members of the Mustelidae in eastern Indonesia. 154. Dogs and cats. See Lako ne’e meo (No. 101) 155. Large feral or wild cat Ngo ngoe Someone with a low, gruff voice An onomatopoeic term, ngo ngoe is the creature’s folk taxonomic name, and a person so described is usually specified as “having a voice like a ngo ngoe” (sezu bhia ko’o ngo ngoe). Most evidence suggests that the zoological referent is a large feral cat, and usually a male, although an alternative possibility is the truly wild Leopard cat Prionailurus bengalensis (Forth 2017b). 156. Spotted or striped cat Meo déto Something or someone ambiguous, not of a consistent or determinate character The phrase denotes a cat with variegated pelage, thus not consistently of a single colour. Combined with “mottled horse” and “speckled fowl” (Nos. 52, 281), it can refer to a territory divided among owners belonging to several different groups. Another application is a person whose character or background is unclear, difficult to make out. In this respect an interesting comparison is English “checkered,” as in a “checkered career” or “checkered past.” 157. (Untranslatable) Gogo meo A kind of spider Neither in this term nor the following (No. 158) is it clear why meo (“cat”) appears in the names of two spiders, although it is worth noting that the

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

119

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 120

word for “cat” also occurs in the name of a spider in the Tetum language of Timor (Mathijsen 1906; Forth 2016, 337–8). Gogo meo further denotes a kind of bogey represented by a crude mask blackened with charcoal and used to frighten children (Forth 2008, 32–6), and indeed cats themselves can serve this function, as when recalcitrant youngsters are told that a cat is coming to get them. 158. (Untranslatable) Kaka meo A kind of spider See No. 157. Kaka occurs, with varying local interpretations, in several other Nage animal names (applied to birds, fish, and lizards), and in the Manggarai language of western Flores kaka has the general meaning of “animal.” The name might therefore be translated as “cat creature.” 159. Cat’s claw Kungu meo A thorny vine Nage describe the thorns as tearing into a person’s flesh, like cats’ claws. 160. Cat’s fur Fu meo A kind of fine grass The grass is described as resembling the fur of a cat. 161. Cat’s tail (or cat’s tail tree) Éko meo (kaju éko meo) A kind of tree Verheijen (1990, 48) lists the same name in Endenese for both Neyraudia arundinacea and Pennisetum macrostachyum. As Nage observe, the magenta blossoms do indeed resemble a cat’s tail. English “cattail” refers to a quite different sort of plant, being the American name for the British “bulrush” – apparently another English plant name incorporating an animal name.

120

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 121

162. Cat’s whiskers Kumi meo A kind of plant The Nage phrase translates the Indonesian name kumis kucing, which Nage normally use for the plant and which, not surprisingly, they describe as a recent introduction. The Indonesian term is also used for what is probably the same plant in So’a, which Verheijen (1990, 28) identifies as Orthosiphon aristatus.

D O M E S T I C M A M M A L M E TA P H O R S

121

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 122

4 Mammals in Metaphor: Exclusively Wild Kinds

DEER • Timor deer Cervus timorensis • KOGHA Given the value Nage place on hunting deer, the small number of deer metaphors is surprising: I recorded just eight, one of which, moreover, may be of foreign derivation while several others have similar human referents. A possible explanation may be found in details of Nage oral history, which suggest that central Nage have moved into regions where deer are available as regular game only during the last two to three hundred years. At present, deer occur only in less forested areas to the north of central Nage, and consistent with both observations is the evidently external origin of special terms associated with deer in central Nage, especially terms denoting growth stages, which reflect dialects spoken to the north and northeast. Also noteworthy is a lack of certainty regarding how long deer have been present anywhere on Flores Island (Forth 2016, 108–9, 327–8). 163. Deer bathe, (wild) pigs wallow Kogha poma, wawi jola People indulging in an abundance of palm juice (or palm wine) Composing a standard binary composite kogha wawi, “deer [and] wild pigs” are the most valued game animals for Nage and together form the object of the annual ritual hunt. The present parallelism forms part of a longer ritual request made when tapping Arenga palms (Arenga pinnata), especially when a palm is tapped for the first time. The ritual leader then requests that the

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 123

Figure 10 Hunters at a shrine, annual ritual hunt (No. 163)

palm or palms deliver an abundance of juice (toddy) – so much that deer and pigs will be able to bathe and wallow in it and that the trees will be swarmed by sunbirds and friarbirds, nectar-feeding species that drink palm juice (see Nos. 343, 412). Commentators disagreed as to whether the phrases refer metaphorically to human beings. However, the situation hyperbolically conveyed by the expression clearly refers to a great abundance, not of bathing water or mud but of palm juice, thus something to be enjoyed not by animals but exclusively by humans. As regards pigs in particular, the metaphor recalls the English usage “pig in muck” (see also “like a pig in clover,” Palmatier 1995, 236), referring to a situation in which people are “in their element” and thus experience great enjoyment or contentment. One regular commentator further interpreted the metaphor as referring to a woman who makes herself

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

123

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 124

available for sex with anyone and whose body is thus comparable to a wallow or mudhole (poma or jola), a place used by any animal wishing to take a bath. 164. Deer down in the plain Kogha lau mala Someone who acts without restraint, does not follow rules, and behaves without regard to others; an arrogant person One commentator linked the metaphor with the habit of deer that run freely with heads held high and apparently pay no attention to whatever they pass, an interpretation that recalls another deer metaphor (No. 168). Lau mala, “down in the plain, lowlands,” refers to the region where deer are found, a large part of which lies beyond the territory of central Nage proper. As noted previously, for central Nage, the direction named lau (seaward, downstream, thus to the north) holds negative connotations, and these are also revealed in other animal metaphors (Nos. 36, 87, 103). Before the twentieth century, Nage regularly waged war in several regions to the north (lau), from which they took many captives as slaves. 165. Deer glanced by a spear Kogha ghabi tuba A person who immediately flees from a place after being given a fright The metaphor describes a deer that a spear has just missed or wounded only slightly and that is therefore panicked into flight. 166. Deer that has entered a village Kogha kono bo’a Someone who finds him- or herself in an unfamiliar place or situation and does not know where to turn As noted earlier (No. 77) the metaphor may derive from the Indonesian national language. Its motivation lies in the nervous disposition of deer that, finding themselves caught in a place from which they cannot easily escape, will become alarmed and run hither and yon.

124

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 125

167. Lota deer Kogha lota Someone who behaves in a confused, chaotic, or erratic way; a person who appears nervous or ill at ease The metaphor is motivated by the behaviour of deer when alarmed or set to flight. Lota was first recorded in the phrase lota lata, understood as a synonym of ‘ila ‘ala, “chaotic, confused, startled,” but the meaning of lota alone is unknown to most Nage, and it is evidently not a local term. A few informants, however, described lota as a term for “deer” in other parts of central Flores, and, as I was able to confirm from subsequent fieldwork, the term denotes male deer in the Lamaholot dialects of the far eastern part of Flores and the adjoining islands of Solor and Adonara. Central Nage sometimes reduce kogha lota to lota – as in “(to be, behave) like a lota” – or lota witu, “forest lota,” in reference to which some informants interpreted the terms as denoting an animal of an unkown kind. “Forest lota” recalls Réndu and Munde rusa witu, “deer,” which distinguishes deer from goats, usually designated simply as rusa (Forth 2012a). 168. Male deer that keeps running not looking where it is going Kogha lota bholo ngada doa An ill-mannered person without regard for others In regard to this expression particularly, it is interesting that Lamaholot lota (see No. 167) refers specifically to male deer. Ngada means to “hold one’s head high,” as does doa in this context, so the two words together convey a single sense. (Bholo is “only, just, nothing but.”) According to Nage, a characteristic of people thus described is that they will ignore other people as they pass by, like a large buck not looking to the left or right as it runs freely. Both semantically and in regard to the animal behaviour on which it is based, the metaphor overlaps significantly with two other deer metaphors (Nos. 164, 167). Mature male deer, presumably because of the weight of their antlers, keep their heads raised not only when moving but also when standing still – like an arrogant person with his “head in the air.” However, while implying arrogance, the Nage phrase can simply refer to a lack of good manners.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

125

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 126

169. Deer rattan Ua kogha A kind of grass Despite the name, the plant is not a kind of rattan but a sort of thin-stemmed grass with very long roots that are difficult to pull up. Verheijen (1990, 43) lists the So’a cognate ura kogha as the name for Sida acuta and S. rhombifolia. 170. Deer’s hoof Kuku kogha A kind of small tree or shrub Described by one commentator as resembling a vine, the plant is so named because both the stem and the fruit are hard, like a deer’s hooves. The fruits are used in a children’s game called bedi koki.

PORCUPINE • Javan porcupine Hystrix javanica • KUTU Introduced by humans from more westerly Indonesian islands some four thousand years ago, porcupines have long been present on Flores and are hunted regularly. Hunting porcupines requires special techniques and involves speech taboos bound up with the animals’ status as possessions of forest spirits. However, Nage metaphors incorporating the porcupine are few, and none refers to this spiritual status nor (with the possible exception of the first listed below) to porcupine hunting. The fact that the central Nage name for the porcupine, kutu, is a homonym of their term for “louse” (see No. 531) is explained elsewhere (Forth 2016, 115). This may be the place to mention another practice concerning porcupines, one I have previously characterized as a “symbolic or metaphorical usage” (Forth 2004c, 433; Forth 2016, 151–9) and, moreover, as an instance of irony. When distinguishing sex in porcupines, Nage employ the sex differentiable terms for birds and other non-mammals, even though they are quite definite that porcupines are not birds but mammals and therefore speak of this as an extraordinary and puzzling linguistic practice. As a figurative usage, calling porcupines, in effect, “cocks” and “hens” is most comparable to the naming of certain animals with terms referring to other, quite different, animals –

126

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 127

for example calling the mole-cricket “sky dog” (lako lizu, No. 110) in the full knowledge that the insect is not a dog and resembles dogs only insofar as it dig holes in the earth. The parallel finds support in the fact that, just as molecrickets possess no other name, so applying the sex differentiable terms for non-mammals is the only way, or at least the only correct way, of verbally distinguishing male and female porcupines. 171. Blaming the porcupine, accusing the Giant rat, as it happens the male monkey is equally guilty ‘Udu kutu, pe’u bétu, laka ‘o’a mosa ta’a sala mogha A person (especially a man) who accuses others of wrong-doing but who himself participates equally in the same misdeeds Employed as a proverb, the expression has several variants. Sala (“to be in error”) is sometimes replaced by naka, meaning “steal”; other times naka or sala are left out altogether so people simply say ‘o’a laka mogha, “the monkey is in fact the same” or “has done the same.” In addition, Nage often specify a “male monkey,” as in the version given here. As the monkey represents a hypocritical accuser, the metaphor is virtually synonymous with “monkey scolding a pig” (No. 225) and indeed has the same meaning as the English expression “the kettle calling the pot black.” (A Nage botanical metaphor of identical import is pau ‘udu mude, “mango accuses the orange,” two fruits that are equally sweet, and equally sour when unripe.) Its motivation lies partly in the fact that all three creatures are wild animals that steal from cultivated fields, in which respect it is further noteworthy that monkeys usually do more damage than either porcupines or Giant rats. At the same time, since other animals, including domestic animals, also do damage to crops, the selection of kutu (porcupine) and bétu (Giant rat) together with the largely synonymous verbs ‘udu and pe’u appears decisively determined by prosodic considerations, as is the juxtaposition of ‘o’a (“monkey”) and mogha (“also, as well, equally”), and also mosa (where a male monkey is specified) – in each instance with regard to assonance involving the vowel combinations e//u, u//u, and o//a. Nevertheless, it is additionally significant that “porcupine” and “Giant rat” also combine to form a standard binary composite, kutu bétu, designating nocturnally hunted animals of similar size and shape (Forth 2016, 143). This suggests, then, that the basic opposition is between “porcupine” and “monkey,” as in No. 173.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

127

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 128

172. Live like a porcupine Muzi bhia ko’o kutu A person who leads a regular, orderly life The metaphor draws on the fact that porcupines, after going out in search of food, always return to the same hole and will use this hole over long periods of time. In this regard, Nage contrast porcupines to junglefowl (No. 367), and I first recorded the expression in the form of a customary admonition: “Let us not live in the manner of junglefowl, let us live like porcupines” (muzi ma’e bhia ko’o kata, muzi kita bhia ko kutu). Given the similarity of the names kutu and kata, prosody apparently provides further motivation for this association, yet the attributed behavioural contrast seems also to reflect zoologically accurate observation of the two creatures.

Figure 11 Porcupines in a cage (No. 172)

128

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 129

173. Porcupine digging, monkey breaking Kutu koe, ‘o’a sae A person who consumes things in a destructive and wasteful manner without any thought for economy The phrases focus on porcupines and monkeys as destructive crop pests. Porcupines will dig up whole plants to obtain the roots, thereby destroying the entire plant; monkeys cause similar damage, for example when they snap or break off the stems of ripening maize. 174. Small porcupine Kutu pudi A small, stocky, or well-built person Nage speak of kutu pudi as a particular kind of porcupine, distinct from a larger sort called kutu kua, but since only one species of porcupine has been recorded for Flores kutu pudi likely refers simply to smaller specimens, which Nage describe as typically fleshier than larger porcupines. A person described as being like a “small porcupine” is someone who is short but robust and well-proportioned, and the phrase is often applied to a young child who is plump and solidly built. In the latter case especially, the condition can be described as hume, usually translatable as “fat.” 175. Porcupine’s gall-bladder (tree) Pedhu kutu (lo pedhu kutu) A kind of tree Generally described as a tree so named because it tastes extremely bitter, like the gall-bladder of a porcupine, the bark is used to treat malaria and also as a contraceptive. One informant, however, described it not as a tree but as a kind of grass, though one also with a bitter taste and similarly employed in treating symptoms of malaria and illness of the spleen. For So’a, Verheijen (1990) provisionally identifies the plant name tuka kutu (“porcupine’s stomach”) as a species of Tinospora, a herbaceous vine. It would appear, therefore, that “porcupine gall-bladder” may refer to more than one kind of bitter-tasting medicinal plant. Nage also use the bark of the zita tree, Alstonia scholaris, to treat fevers apparently caused by malaria.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

129

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 130

FLORES GIANT RAT • Papagomys armandvillei • BÉTU In view of Nage familiarity with this remarkable animal, it is surprising how few metaphors employ the Giant rat. The species is the largest of the world’s murids (rats and mice) and is endemic to Flores. Distinctive in regard to its much greater size (up to eighty centimetres from head to tail), its aggressive temperament, and injurious bite – and thus the danger it poses to hunters and their dogs (Forth 2016, 120–1) – the Giant rat is distinguished in Nage animal taxonomy from all other rats and mice, collectively designated as dhéke (a category that can also include shrews). At the same time, although not classified as a kind of “rat” (dhéke), Nage recognize morphological and other similarities between Giant rats and other rats, and this contrast is exploited in three metaphors listed in the next section (Nos. 182–4). 176. Accusing the Giant rat, Pe’u bétu. See Blaming the porcupine (No. 171) 177. Belly like a dead Giant rat Tuka bhia ko’o bétu mata A person with a large, distended, or bloated belly As Nage remark, all Giant rats have large bellies, but the bellies of dead specimens are even larger, owing to bloating caused by putrefaction. For obvious reasons, the phrase is also applied to a glutton. 178. Giant rat in a cave whose belly is full of faeces, eats new sabi leaves (and) waits for the night when she will give birth Bétu lépa lia ta’i mo’o biza, sepa ngolo sabi kéze kobe mo’o dhadhi A promiscuous woman who consorts with various men and is therefore continually pregnant Yet another example of the genre pata néke (see chapter 2), these are lyrics sung while circle-dancing. Leaves of the sabi tree (Schleichera oleosa) are a common food of Giant rats. In at least two respects the phrases recall a buffalo metaphor (No. 11): lépa is a direction term used in the Géro dialect, while “cave, rockshelter” (lia) recalls Kawa, with the same meaning, though in No. 11 it is interpreted as the name of a particular place.

130

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 131

Figure 12 Dog with Giant rat (No. 176)

179. Giant rat’s belly Tuka bétu An ingrate; a person with a large, bloated belly In the second sense the phrase is synonymous with No. 177. With regard to the first, commentators remarked how, as very large, herbivorous rodents, Giant rats eat a great deal but also produce large amounts of faeces, so that someone whose “belly” is like a Giant rat’s similarly receives positive things (such as material help or favours) but reciprocates with bad behaviour. Nage might thus reprimand such a person by saying “I give you food, (but) your belly is like that of a Giant rat; you treat me badly” (nga’o ti’i kau ka, tuka kau tuka bétu, kau tau ‘é’e wai nga’o). The usage somewhat recalls the English metaphor “nourish a snake (or viper) in one’s bosom,” an expression deriving from the Aesop’s fable in which a farmer places a frozen viper inside his shirt

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

131

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 132

Figure 13 Hunter with Giant rat (No. 179)

to revive it but, after the creature recovers, is “rewarded” by the snake’s biting him (cited by Palmatier 1995, 271).

RATS and MICE (or “murids”) • Muridae • DHÉKE As a conventional metaphor, dhéke is unusual insofar as the category has been interpreted as a folk-intermediate (Forth 2012b; Forth 2016, 122–3), a more inclusive taxon subsuming five folk-generics. Of these five, only two are explicitly named in murid metaphors. One is dhéke laghi (No. 192); the other is mucu ‘o, denoting shrews, which, although scientifically identified as insectivores rather than rodents, are classified by Nage as a kind of dhéke. Some

132

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 133

metaphors employing dhéke can be interpreted as equally referring to smaller “mice” (dhéke menge or ana menge) and possibly dhéke laghi as well. On the other hand, there is no indication that any rat metaphor specifically alludes to dhéke ngewo, a kind of large forest-dwelling rat. As noted, dhéke does not include Giant rats, separately named as bétu, a circumstance facilitating the metaphorical use of these two categories as contrasting terms in Nos. 182–4. The number and variety of Nage murid metaphors accords with their very regular occurrence inside Nage houses and settlements. Since dhéke covers both rats and mice, translating these metaphors into English poses an obvious problem (see Eco 2003; Forth 2012b), and although I have mostly identified “rat” as the more appropriate term, it should be understood that in some instances “mouse” would be a suitable alternative. In his dictionary of the neighbouring Ngadha language, Arndt (1961, s.v. dhéke) mentions two murid metaphors I never heard in central Nage. One is “like a mouse that steals grain” referring to “a person who quickly carries something away”; the other is “mouth like a rat,” meaning “to speak rapidly; to prattle, chatter, babble.” The second mostly corresponds to two Nage shrew metaphors (Nos. 198, 200), although Nage interpret these as referring to someone who talks constantly rather than rapidly. 180. Having a single testicle like a male rat Base bhia ko’o dhéke hase A monorchid, a man possessing only one testicle As discussed elsewhere (Forth 2012b), it is doubtful whether many Nage actually believe that all male murids are monorchids, and in fact the metaphor appears to be largely motivated by prosody – specifically, the rhyme of base (“monorchid”) with hase, a sex differentiable term specifically denoting male murids (dhéke). Although I have discussed hase several times in print, only recently did I discover probable cognates in Lio lase (cf. Nage, Ngadha lasu, “penis”), a term Arndt (1933) glosses as “male member,” and Ngadha lase, “testicles and scrotum” (Arndt 1961). A connection of Nage hase with lase seems confirmed by the further occurrence of the latter in central Keo as a special term for male rats, and especially old male rats (Forth 2018c), thus with essentially the same meaning as Nage hase. All these comparisons support my previous interpretation of the Nage term as having a specifically sexual, or more particularly genital, reference (Forth 2004c; Forth 2012b, 61).

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

133

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 134

At the same time, Nage will occasionally interpret base (“monorchid”) in the foregoing expression as a reference to an empirical feature in male murids, and, to that extent, rather than experience of animals providing the source of a metaphor, it would appear that the metaphor may have given rise to a quasi-empirical idea (Forth 2016). On the other hand, the expression is rarely used, if at all, to refer to males who are actually monorchids but functions instead as a pejorative uttered in ribald banter among Nage men. 181. Immature mouse (or rat) Ana dhéke Human biceps; an abrasion or reddening of the skin This is yet another animal term applied to part of the human body, although, in this instance, to a bodily condition as well. Expressed for example in ana dhéke gedho, “a little mouse comes out” (referring to the flexing of the biceps), in regard to its first sense the metaphor is virtually identical to Latin musculis, “little mouse,” applied to muscles in general and of course reflected in the English word. In its second sense the metaphor is recognized as deriving from the raw redness of naked newborn rats and mice. Of someone whose hands are red, from abrasion or friction, Nage thus say, “your hands are as red as a baby rat (or mouse)” (lima kau bhia ana dhéke). 182. Mouse (or rat) mocking a Giant rat Dhéke néke bétu Someone who derides or criticizes a superior person The phrase can refer to a child or young person who derides an older adult, or a low-ranking person criticizing someone of high rank. The metaphor is motivated by the difference in size between the Giant rat (bétu) and smaller murids coinciding with an overall morphological similarity, and in this and the two following expressions (Nos. 183, 184) I therefore translate dhéke as “mouse” in order to emphasize this difference. Although the usage clearly turns on an analogy between the two animals and distinctions of social position, prosody has evidently influenced the selection of néke (in this context best translated as “mock”) as a reference to the action of the smaller rodent (dhéke).

134

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 135

183. Mouse (or rat) taking care of a Giant rat Dhéke pagha bétu A person who looks after a member of another community or group Pagha, “to care or provide for, to raise,” describes caring for both children and animals. As one commentator pointed out, while denoting physically very similar creatures dhéke and bétu nonetheless name two different sorts of animals. Thus the metaphor typically refers to someone who assists a person he or she is not normally obligated to assist. As Giant rats (bétu) are significantly larger and also more aggressive than other rats and mice (dhéke), the metaphor applies especially to helping people who are quite capable of caring for themselves, more capable even than the one who gives assistance and who may do so at the cost of giving less support to people to whom she/he is socially closer, including members of her/his own family. 184. Mouse (or rat) turned into a Giant rat Dhéke bale bétu A person who changes position on an issue; people of low rank who act as though they were of high rank Commentators offered two different interpretations of this usage, but both obviously reflecting the same physical contrast between Giant rats and other murids and their folk taxonomic treatment as essentially different animals. That it is the smaller animal that transforms into the larger is of course especially relevant to the second use, which Nage explained as a synonym of “the slave becomes the master” (ho’o bale ga’e) – another common expression that is not always employed literally. Especially in the first sense the metaphor can be expressed as “your speech is like, you speak like a (smaller) rat turning into a Giant rat” (punu e kau bhia dhéke bale bétu), and in one case I heard it used in reference to a man who claimed certain rumours were false but who – as the speaker pointed out – subsequently spoke as though they were true. While Nage entertain ideas about various sorts of animals transforming into animals of different kinds (Forth 2016, 276–94), smaller murids (dhéke) turning into Giant rats is not among these.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

135

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 136

185. Rat above (in a high place) Dhéke zéle Something or someone that distracts the attention of people engaged in conversation or another activity The phrase describes a rat or mouse that scampers along the rafters or some other part of a house. When this happens, everyone typically looks up and neglects what they are doing, so that their activity or conversation is disturbed. I first recorded the metaphor in reference to a cell (mobile) phone going off in the middle of a discussion. Subsequent ethnographic conversations of mine were disturbed by actual rats and were described in the same way. 186. Rat inside a bamboo rafter Dhéke loki A person who eats noisily; someone who talks excessively Loki are roof supports of giant bamboo. Not naming any particular kind of murid, dhéke loki refers to any commensal rat or mouse that gnaws into, enters, and nests inside a loki, where it continues to gnaw holes. The reference to a noisy eater alludes to the noise made by the gnawing rats. The second expression compares a noisy rat to a person who talks too much, thereby revealing matters that should be kept within one’s own group and exposing the group to harm from others. In the same way, holes made by “rafter rats” can cause rafters to crack and collapse and thus weaken a house, so the usage involves the same identification of a physical dwelling with a kin group – also contextually called a “house” (sa’o) – expressed in other metaphors (e.g., No. 187). 187. Rat that damages a house Dhéke ta’a ‘é’e sa’o A person who causes harm to his own group In this phrase ‘é’e (“ugly, bad”) has the verbal sense of “to make ugly, deface.” The expression necessarily refers to a commensal rat or mouse while the house is of course one inhabited by the rodent itself. Implicitly, like a rat that

136

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 137

ruins the house in which it lives, a person who, through words or deeds, does damage to his own group – by causing disunity or reducing the group’s reputation or weakening its position vis-à-vis others – also does damage to himor herself. 188. Rat with a broken placenta Dhéke funi beta A person who abandons a task before completing it Expressed as “speaking like a rat with a broken placenta” (punu bhia dhéke ta’a funi beta), the phrase can refer specifically to someone who abandons one topic of conversation and then begins talking about something else. Applied generally to mammals as well as humans, “broken placenta” describes a potentially fatal condition wherein part of the afterbirth remains stuck in the birth canal. No one could suggest why the metaphor specifies rats, so the selection of this animal would appear to be completely arbitrary. 189. Rat without an escape hole Dhéke ta’a wuwu mona A person who begins something he or she is unable to complete Nage speak of holes, cavities, and caves (all designated as lia) as always having, besides an entrance, a passage leading to another opening used as an exit. This is one sense of wuwu; another is “fontanelle.” Although I have never encountered the usage, it would seem likely that the metaphor also applies to people who enter into a situation or dealing from which they are unable to extricate themselves. The Nage phrase is reminiscent of “trapped like a rat,” but the English metaphor evidently has a different motivation, relating to human rat catching. 190. Rat’s face Ngia dhéke Someone who appears nervous or lacking in composure The metaphor alludes to the twitching face or snout of a rat as it sniffs the air. It can also be used to describe an ugly human face.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

137

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 138

191. Rat’s throat Foko dhéke Folds, fleshy segments on the human fingers and toes The phrase seems not to be so widely known as other metaphorical uses of parts of animal bodies to refer to (different) parts of human bodies. In one view, moreover, it should refer only to folds of the toes, where the toes meet the ball of the foot. The metaphor apparently reflects the small size of a murid’s neck rather, or more, than any similarity in shape between this and the folds in human digits. 192. Scampering rat Dhéke laghi Someone who is restless and cannot keep still As a folk taxon (more specifically a folk-generic), dhéke laghi (laghi, “to scamper,” “to spring [from place to place]”) names a particular kind of commensal rat (probably the Polynesian rat Rattus exulans) that Nage describe as especially active and mischievous. I recorded two possible applications: boisterous, misbehaving children who run hither and yon causing disturbance and who may be compared to scampering rats as a chastisement; and people who live an unsettled existence. According to one regular commentator, the term is also used as a metaphor for people of low status and in straightened circumstances. In this connection, he further noted how, in Nage animal taxonomy, dhéke laghi refers to a murid intermediate in size between the largest kind of commensal rat (dhéke méze, including Rattus rattus, the house rat) and the smallest (dhéke menge or ana menge, one or more species of mice Mus spp.). 193. Rat bells Woda dhéke A small plant This is possibly a species of Crotalaria, or “rattlepods” (following Verheijen 1990, 44, who gives this identification for a plant of the same name in a Ngadha dialect). The plant is so named because the dried seed pods, when shaken, sound like bells and are therefore used by children as playthings.

138

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 139

Woda, however, can also refer to testicles (usually called ‘ade), and, according to a different interpretation, the name means “rat’s testicles.” If this is correct, it may reflect a more general association of male rats with sexuality (see No. 180). 194. Rat’s ears Hinga dhéke A kind of vine or creeping plant Both in size and form, the small leaves of the vine are said to resemble the ears of a rat. 195. Rat jackfruit Mo dhéke A kind of jackfruit (Artocarpus sp.) So named because the fruit are smaller than other jackfruit, this is one of at least five kinds Nage distinguish by name. 196. Rat’s tail Éko dhéke A dead palm tree The term more specifically refers to old, dead coconut or (less often) areca palms with just a few withered boughs and possibly fruit left at the top, thus consisting of little more than the trunk and suggesting the tail of an enormous rat (see Figure 14). Expressed as éko te’u I recorded the same usage in the Lio region (Wolo Ri’a). The visible appearance of a rat’s tail identically informs English metaphors like “rat-tail file” and “rat-tail comb” (Palmatier 1995, 317). 197. Lips like a shrew Wunu mumu bhia ko’o mucu ‘o A gossip Although shrews (Soricidae: Suncus spp., Crocidura spp.) belong to the scientific order Soricomorpha (formerly Insectivora), their classification by

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

139

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 140

Figure 14 “Rat’s tail” (No. 196)

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 141

Nage with mice and rats (dhéke) recalls earlier English “shrew-mouse” and modern German “Spitzmaus.” The present expression is virtually identical to “a mouth like a shrew” (No. 198), yet several commentators interpreted it as referring to someone who spreads gossip, especially gossip that proves harmful to others. In the same context, one of my most regular informants mentioned the shrew’s long, pointed snout and reported an idea (which I never heard from anyone else) that the snout can penetrate the anuses of larger rats; accordingly, he added, rats are scared of shrews, despite their much smaller size. This idea possibly reflects the pugnacity of shrews, a characteristic that may have inspired the English application of “shrew” to an ill-tempered, sharp-tongued woman. With reference to the English metaphor, Ammer (1989, 127) describes shrews as “disproportionately fierce” for their size, “fight[ing] one another to the death over a morsel of food,” and as “so pugnacious that at one time they were thought to be poisonous to farm animals who [sic] happened to cross their path.” These traits were then transferred to a “person of unpleasant personality, particularly one who nagged or scolded,” a metaphor later restricted to women. Nevertheless, how far the pugnacity of shrews may inform its metaphorical relation to human gossips among Nage is uncertain. 198. Mouth like a shrew Mumu bhia ko’o mucu ‘o Someone who talks constantly A more exact interpretation is “person whose mouth moves constantly, like the snout of a shrew.” The metaphor may recall the English idiom “to rabbit (on),” used in Britain as a reference to garrulousness and possibly motivated by the similar twitching of a rabbit’s nose. According to another interpretation, the British usage derives from rhyming slang “rabbit and pork,” meaning “to talk” (Franklyn 1975, 112). However, the possible relevance of the twitching noses of lagomorphs is still suggested by the fact that it is not “rabbit” but “pork” that rhymes with “talk.” Contrary to what might be expected, the Nage metaphor does not additionally refer to someone who speaks rapidly, a habit compared instead to the sizzling of “sesame being fried” (bhia seo lenga).

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

141

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 142

199. Smelling like a shrew Ngudu bhia mucu ‘o Someone who smells bad The motivation is the unpleasant odour emitted by shrews. A feature of shrews mentioned most often by Nage, this smell is registered in the animal’s name, mucu ‘o, which apparently derives from moco, understood as meaning “(extremity of the) snout, muzzle” (cf. Ngadha muzu, muju, Arndt 1961) and ‘o (dialectal ro), interpreted as cognate with Ngada rou, “to smell, stink” (Forth 2012b, 56). 200. Snout like a shrew Kuba bhia ko’o mucu ‘o A person who never stops talking; someone with an ugly face The expression is largely synonymous with No. 198, but because it has a second interpretation, describing a person who in one sense of the English expression would likely be described as “rat-faced,” I list it separately.

CIVET Palm civet • Paradoxurus hermaphroditus • BHEKU Sometimes named “civet cat” or “toddy cat” (both erroneous epithets because the creature, although carnivorous, is not a cat), the Palm civet, an arboreal weasel-like animal, will likely be known to coffee-aficionados as the producer, by way of its digestive system, of what is known in Indonesian as kopi luwak, or “civet coffee.” Palm civets are familiar animals in central Nage, not so much for their consumption of coffee berries (though they eat these on Flores as well) but as consumers of fruit and as an occasional object of the hunt. Although the Palm civet emits a distinctive musk, which people described as strong-smelling but not particularly unpleasant, the scent has no significance for Nage – other than indicating a civet’s presence, especially at night when the animal cannot be seen – and does not inform any of the expressions analyzed below. By contrast, the animal’s distinctive high-pitched wail or whine is the vehicle of two metaphors (Nos. 203, 207), while two others explicitly or implicitly entail an association between civets and cats (Nos. 201, 206).

142

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 143

Unlike other eastern Indonesians, Nage do not attach any ominous significance to a civet’s wailing, at least not for humans (see No. 203). One largely non-empirical idea regarding the Palm civet is that males have more than one pair of testicles. The notion apparently reflects the animal’s possession of scent glands, which can be confused with testicles; and the occurrence of these in female as well as male animals accounts for the Latinate species name hermaphroditus. But the idea of multiple testicles is not essential to any Nage metaphor, nor is another notion – that, through transformation, civets can derive from aged flying foxes (fruit bats; Forth 2016, 127–8, 276–90). 201. Civet (inadequately) covering its droppings Bheku ta’i sesi An untidy person The metaphor refers, for example, to someone who scatters or leaves articles lying untidily about, not putting things away in their proper places. As Nage explain, civets defecate in various places, so their faeces can be found anywhere – unlike cats, which bury their faeces. 202. Civet in a dead Arenga palm Bheku one bobo A person who disdains the company of others The metaphor refers to a recluse who habitually remains inside his or her house and rarely goes out. The trunks of dead Arenga palms (Arenga pinnata), bobo tua, are common nesting places of civets. 203. Civet that wails surrendering its body Bheku noa noka weki A person who inadvertently reveals a fault or some wrong-doing The metaphor turns on the belief that a civet’s wailing or whining reveals that it will soon “give up” (noka) its body (weki), which is to say its life, and so presages the animal’s death. The idea of ceding as well as the closely related notion of conceding are therefore discernible in both the belief about civets and the metaphor’s application to the human action that it informs. In other

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

143

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 144

parts of Indonesia, a civet’s wailing is taken not as a sign of its own impending death but as a similarly ominous portent for humans. Some Nage say male civets begin wailing after they have developed eight testicles (indicating an advanced age), but this idea plays no part in the motivation of the metaphor. 204. Claw (rip or tear things apart) like a civet Legu bheku Someone who eats in a coarse, ill-mannered way; a person who consumes something, with little concern for economy, until all is gone Another, more specificc reference is someone who is given something by another to look after but who consumes it him- or herself. The motivation is a habit of civets, when they come across ripe fruit, of quickly devouring the fruit, rapaciously tearing (legu) it apart with their sharp claws (see figure 15, which shows a man holding a pet civet, with his arm wrapped in a towel to prevent being scratched). The metaphor is alternatively expressed as tolo legu bheku, where tolo means “all, everything.” 205. Scattered (like) civets, dispersed (like) monkeys Bhéka bheku, égha ‘o’a Members of a family or other kin group who fail to maintain unity in the face of adversity Partly synonymous with “goat droppings” (No. 70), the metaphor describes groups of monkeys and civets scattering in all directions when dogs appear, even to the extent that parent animals, according to Nage commentators, will abandon their offspring. At the same time, prosody evidently plays a role in matching bhéka (“to scatter, disperse”) with bheku (civet) and may even have influenced the selection of Palm civets, especially since these animals, unlike monkeys, do not occur in large groups and are often encountered alone or in pairs. 206. Straight like a civet’s tail Hemu bhia éko bheku A person who is honest and forthright

144

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 145

Figure 15 Pet civet (No. 206)

Sometimes expressed as a proverb, “let us speak straight like a civet’s tail” (gho bhia éko bheku; gho, “straight” can be replaced by the synonymous hemu), the contrast is “bent like a cat’s tail” (No. 144), and the metaphor partly reflects the association of civets and cats embodied in the standard composite term bheku meo. As Nage remark, by contrast to cats, and especially domestic cats, Palm civets have long, bushy, and relatively straight tails (see figure 15). 207. Wailing civet Bheku noa Someone with a fine singing voice or a person emitting a mournful wail from sadness or physical pain

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

145

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 146

The metaphor draws on a Palm civet’s high-pitched whine, a distinctive feature of the animal that recalls the sound of human weeping or keening. The second reference is most evident in phrases used to admonish children not to cry – for example, “you sound like a wailing civet, do not weep so” (kau bhia bheku noa, ma’e ‘ita nangi). For small children to cry too much or too long is deemed pie, “taboo; ominous, inauspicious,” as it can betoken disaster, an idea bound up with the notion that a civet’s wailing can betoken its own impending death (see No. 203). 208. Civet’s vulva Puki bheku A loop spliced at the end of a rope, especially a length of rope forming part of a horse’s bridle The artefact is designated by reference to a perceived resemblance to part of an animal’s body (see figure 16). Although referring to knots rather than a splice, comparable English usages connected with rope-work are “cat’s paw” and “sheepshank” (literally meaning “sheep’s leg” and denoting a knot used for temporarily shortening a length of rope).

MONKEY Crab-eating or Long-tailed macaque • Macaca fascicularis • ‘O’A (dialectal RO’A) As elsewhere on Flores, monkeys, introduced to the island some four thousand years ago, are common animals in central Nage and in many places pose a serious threat to crops. Not only are the animals relatively numerous, but, unlike other wild mammals, they are exclusively diurnal, and Nage commonly keep monkeys as pets. Given also their physical resemblance to humans, it is thus hardly surprising that monkeys appear in a large number of metaphors. In fact, among mammals, monkeys are outdone only by the dog and the water buffalo, and there are, moreover, more monkey metaphors specifically referring to human behaviour than there are either dog or buffalo metaphors. In addition, monkeys are used more often than are other animals to refer to human physical features and abilities.

146

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 147

Figure 16 “Civet’s vulva” (No. 208)

209. Dispersed (like) monkeys, égha ‘o’a. See Scattered (like) civets (No. 205) 210. Driving away monkeys, oha ‘o’a. See Scaring off cockatoos (No. 309) 211. Face of a monkey Ngia ‘o’a A person with an ugly or odd-looking face The metaphor is often used in banter or as a generic insult. Usually expressed as “to have a face like a monkey” (bhia ngia ‘o’a or ngia bhia ‘o’a), the phrase

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

147

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 148

was also recorded as a gloss of songi mongi, an unanalyzable expression denoting someone putatively possessing a simian face. A more elaborate variant is “a face like a monkey planting (gourds and cucumbers)” (ngia bhia na’a ‘o’a sewe). This was explained as alluding to “a monkey more ugly than other monkeys,” but what the activity described in the subordinate clause might allude to I was unable to determine. 212. Fingers of a monkey Kanga ‘o’a Someone with dirty hands, especially a child As informants remarked, unlike humans, monkeys never wash their hands before eating. Although the expression specifies “fingers” (kanga, a term also applied to the toes or digits of dogs, cats, and various other animals), monkeys are the only mammals Nage describe as having “hands, arms” (lima). 213. Hands or arms like a monkey Lima bhia lima ‘o’a A person possessing exceptional manual skill The expression refers to dexterity, for example in throwing and catching objects and, Nage remarked, especially concerns monkeys’ ability to grasp firmly onto branches as they move through trees. As is general in Malayo-Polynesian languages, lima denotes hands and arms without distinction, but, in regard to both humans and monkeys, in the present metaphor it refers more specifically to hands. 214. Head hair like a monkey Fu bhia fu ‘o’a A person with untidy head hair Fu denotes hair generally – and in regard to birds, feathers as well – but here refers more specifically to head hair (fu ulu). According to Nage interpretations, someone may have untidy hair like a monkey either because it is dirty and dishevelled or because it is soft or fine and so does not stay in place. Pae bhia fu ‘o’a, “rice like monkey fur,” describes stunted rice plants, the grains of

148

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 149

which are small and few because of disease or having been planted in infertile or poorly hydrated soil. 215. Large, elderly male monkey ‘O’a pode An untidy man of unclean or unkempt appearance Usually expressed as “looking like an old male monkey” (bhia ko’o ‘o’a pode), this may apply especially to a man whose beard is unshaven or unplucked. 216. Legs and arms of a monkey Taga lima ‘o’a A young man who is especially agile and energetic Like No. 213 the metaphor alludes to the quickness and skill of monkeys especially in climbing and moving about in trees. A more complete variant is suko bhia taga lima ‘o’a, “young man who has legs and arms like a monkey.” A comparable English metaphor is “climb like a monkey,” which according to Palmatier (1995, 82) particularly refers to the agility with which children climb and swing on monkey bars and other types of playground equipment. 217. Like a monkey fooled by the sun Bhia leza wole ‘o’a An older man who takes a young wife but dies not long afterwards The metaphor may apply more generally to people who think they have sufficient time to do or complete something when in fact they do not. Leza wole ‘o’a (“sun fools monkeys”) is a standard expression referring to the time just before sunset. At this time, the top of the volcano Ebu Lobo is still bathed in sunshine, while the lower slopes are already in shadow. Thus monkeys observing the top of the volcano, Nage say, will think there is still time to bathe before night falls, but since the sun sets before they come out of the water, they are left soaking and shivering. The idea, of course, turns on the image of the monkey as a trickster (further revealed in Nos. 220 and 225).

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

149

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 150

218. Masturbating female monkey ‘O’a ta’a kuwi puki A woman who pleasures herself Kuwi puki is “to pinch, squeeze the vagina.” Like the male equivalent “masturbating male monkey” (No. 219), the phrase functions as an abusive expression used mostly in anger. Since I never heard it used, it is unclear whether or how often the phrase is uttered by or addressed to women, but it is unlikely often to be addressed by a male speaker to a female. 219. Masturbating male monkey ‘O’a ta’a kési lasu A man who masturbates Like the female equivalent (No. 218), this too is mostly used to express anger or frustration with a person. Kési lasu means “to pull on the penis.” As Nage observe, while sitting in trees monkeys are never completely still and regularly pass the time playing with their genitals – hence the zoological motivation for both this and the previous metaphor. 220. Monkey and crab ‘O’a ne’e moga People who do not get along or who deceive one another Usually expressed as “like (a) monkey and (a) crab” (bhia ‘o’a ne’e moga), the metaphor is said to draw on animal characters in a traditional story. However, I never heard the tale, and indeed Nage I asked either did not know it or, if they did, could not recall how it went. In addition, some evidence suggests that the reference may be to another tale, “Frog and monkey” (pake ne’e o’a), in which a monkey tricks a frog but eventually gets his comeuppance, falling to his death as a result of a ruse set by the frog. Moga denotes a small freshwater crab and, if there is such a story, it will have been motivated in part by the crustacean-eating habit of Flores monkeys, all Crab-eating macaques (Macaca fascicularis). 221. Monkey breaking, ‘o’a sae. See Porcupine digging (No. 173)

150

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 151

222. Monkey carrying a gourd ‘O’a ka’o hea A person who is overburdened or takes on too much Hea appears to be Benincasa hispida, the ash gourd or winter melon, the fruit of which can grow up to eighty centimetres in length – obviously a heavy burden for even a large macaque. Ka’o more exactly means “to cradle (in the arms).” The metaphor depicts a monkey cradling a pumpkin it has stolen from a garden, which the creature finds too heavy and so carries with great difficulty. Generally referring to people who have “bitten off more than they can chew,” in one instance the phrase was applied specifically to women who have children in too quick succession and so give birth while they are still “cradling” a previous child – an interpretation evidently influenced by the specific sense of ka’o (“to cradle in the arms,” or in the case of a human mother, in a cradle cloth or sling). The expression is curious insofar as carrying a pumpkin with both hands would appear impossible for quadrupedal macaques, as Nage themselves recognize. One commentator suggested the phrase could be understood as describing two monkeys, each holding onto the gourd with one or both forelimbs and walking either three-legged or sideways. However, I never encountered anyone who claimed to have seen this, and the whole point of the metaphor may be to depict an activity that is virtually impossible. 223. Monkey leaping from tree to tree ‘O’a baki kaju A person who does not maintain a permanent residence; someone who jumps from topic to topic or does not complete a task before starting another The phrase can also denote a growth stage in monkeys, where a youngster begins to practise jumping from branch to branch, starting with the closest ones and then increasing the distance as its skills develop. The motivation is obvious, and, interestingly, the jumping metaphor occurs in one of the English glosses. Nage themselves recognize the several possible applications of the expression.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

151

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 152

224. Monkey roasting a crayfish ‘O’a ngae kuza A person who does something improperly and ineffectively; “any ineffectual practice or action that does not, or cannot, achieve a desired end” (Forth 2016, 132) As indicated by their English name, Crab-eating macaques (the only monkeys on Flores) do indeed catch and consume crustaceans. According to Nage, when the monkeys catch crayfish they will sometimes insert these in the ash or embers of fires set by humans when firing bush or fields, then pull them out and eat them. This activity Nage describe as “roasting” (ngae), yet, as they also remark, although the fires may still be warm, the action is quite ineffective and the crustaceans remain raw. According to one commentator, the expression especially applies to children or young people who attempt to cook without sufficient fire or serve undercooked food. If so, the usage is comparable to “scooping up dirt, playing with coconut shells” (aku awu, dhégha he’a), which refers to children at play imitating the cooking and serving of food, and is a metaphor for temporary, non-marital sexual unions, arrangements that Nage partly represent as a kind of “trial marriage” (Forth 2004b, 333). Other evidence, however, indicates that “monkey roasting a crayfish” refers to people who engage in any sort of ineffectual activity. The metaphor reflects one of several ideas that represent monkeys as imperfect humans and as readily fooled or tricked (Forth 2016, 129–34). Insofar as cooking is an activity exclusive to (mostly adult) humans, the expression also implies imitative behaviour and is therefore comparable to English monkey metaphors, including the proverb “monkey see, monkey do” and “to ape,” which, like the Nage metaphor, often refers to absurd or mindless imitation. Elsewhere, however, I have discussed evidence for primates consuming if not ash then wood charcoal as a dietary supplement or to counteract toxins in plant foods (Forth 2011). 225. Monkey scolding a pig ‘O’a sawi wawi A hypocrite, someone who accuses another of something of which he or she is equally guilty

152

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 153

The metaphor is synonymous with the English “pot calling the kettle black.” For Nage, the usage reflects the fact that both monkeys and pigs (both wild and domestic) raid cultivated fields, though monkeys do so from above – taking fruit from trees or descending from trees – while pigs do so from below. However, the similarity of sawi (to scold) and wawi (pig) suggests rhyme as a further factor possibly motivating the selection of this animal. In contrast, the selection of the monkey appears more substantially connected with its representation as a clever animal and a trickster (Forth 2016, 129–34) – someone who not only tricks others but is himself tricked – and it is noteworthy that, both in the present expression and a largely synonymous metaphor incorporating the porcupine and the Giant rat (see Nos. 171, 176), it is a monkey that represents a human hypocrite. 226. Monkey showing its testicles ‘O’a ta’a kela wola A man sitting with his genitals showing The metaphor derives from the common observation of monkeys sitting in trees scratching their genitalia. The expression is mostly used in friendly banter among men. Nage recognize wola as a Ngadha term for testicles (Nage ‘ade), so this is one of several usages incorporating words from other dialects or languages. 227. Monkey sitting halfway up a tree ‘O’a pu’u da’a A person who is not fully decided or is unwilling to commit completely to something Pu’u da’a (“source, origin, beginning of a branch”) refers to the place where a branch diverges from the trunk, and more generally denotes the lower part of a tree trunk, from which branches first grow. A monkey stopped at this point has gone only midway up the trunk and has yet to climb higher or out to the end of a branch. Thus an English comparison is describing someone as a “fence-sitter.”

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

153

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 154

228. Monkey that does not cling (to trees) ‘O’a mona kebhi (kaju) Something that is impossible or inconceivable Meaning “to cling on, onto, to attach (oneself) to” or “to be securely fixed (to something),” kebhi here refers specifically to a monkey’s great skill in climbing trees, jumping from tree to tree, running along branches, and so on. Comparable usages include kebhi ja, “attached to the horse,” describing a highly skilled rider, and kebhi watu, the alternative name of a freshwater fish that attaches itself to rocks (see kaka watu, Nos. 466, 467). Accordingly, the Nage expression describes a monkey that is “not at home in trees,” a condition contrary to the nature of monkeys and hence an appropriate metaphor for any aspect of a person that is impossible or difficult to conceive. 229. Monkey that has run out of trees ‘O’a kaju tona A person who has exhausted possibilities or is left without options Tona means “to have an insufficient amount of something” (see, e.g., ola ka tona, “to run out of food”). The metaphor invokes the particular image of a monkey fleeing from enemies and jumping from tree to tree but finally arriving at a spot where there is no tree sufficiently close to jump to. According to one interpretation, it specifically applies to an orphan or someone without kin who has no one to call on for assistance. Especially as this also entails animals (albeit domestic rather than wild ones), a comparable English metaphor is “to be at the end of one’s tether.” 230. Monkey threatening a dog ‘O’a luku lako A less powerful man who takes on someone more powerful This can concern either physical or social power, and the usual reference is a person, typically a man, who begins a dispute with another with little or no chance of success. As one commentator remarked, someone may act thus because he has an unrealistically high opinion of himself. The metaphor reflects the use of dogs in hunting monkeys and guarding fields against their depre-

154

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 155

Figure 17 Pet monkey (No. 231)

dations. Commentators also remarked how large monkeys will sometimes hold their ground against an advancing dog. 231. Monkey with its cheeks full of Job’s tears ‘O’a tébo ke’o A person with a mouth full of food; someone with fat cheeks or jowls Ke’o is the cereal Coix lacryma-jobi. In the first sense, the phrase refers to a greedy or very hungry person who takes too large mouthfuls. As Nage are aware, monkeys (specifically Crab-eating macaques) possess cheek pouches in which they hold food. A monkey with a distended cheek pouch can be seen in figure 17; it had just been eating fruit.

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

155

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 156

232. Monkeys fighting over tamarind fruits ‘O’a tange nage Rowdy people squabbling over something As monkeys will fight over many things, assonance has evidently played a part in combining tange (“fight over”) and nage (“tamarind”). 233. Monkeys have their places, ‘o’a ne’e loka. See Fish fry have their pools (No. 471) 234. Monkeys of Oki Deu pull back the foreskin, monkeys of Oki Nage tear at the cloth ‘O’a Oki Deu kési seu kési seu, ‘o’a Oki Nage wisi ‘agi wisi ‘agi People stimulating their genitals or masturbating Literally meaning “to tear a textile,” wisi ‘agi is a metaphor within a metaphor and is understood both here and more generally as “manipulating the genitals.” Kési is “to pull, take off (for example, clothing)” while one meaning of seu is “playing in the dirt” (said of children), but commentators equated kési seu with the apparently more explicit kési lasu, “to pull on the penis.” In this regard, two separate monkey metaphors (Nos. 218, 219) are evidently combined in the present expression, where prosodic considerations have clearly played a role in matching the more euphemistic seu and ‘agi with the proper names Deu and and Nage. Considered extremely coarse, the parallel phrases are sung by groups of men and women addressing one another in sexual banter, thus providing another example of the genre called pata néke. Oki Deu is the name of an ancient village from where branches of clan Deu, now partly settled in the village of Bo’a Wae, claim to derive. Although “Oki Nage” also suggests a place name, where this might be or have been located I was unable to establish, and in the present expression it might be understood as another name for Oki Deu or, alternatively, for the ancient village of Nata Nage. Especially in a view of local history advanced by Deu in Bo’a Wae, the group of the colonially appointed Nage rajas, contextually “Deu” and “Nage” appear virtual synonyms (Forth 2009a), and in the present expression both Nage and Deu may further be understood as referring to the Nage (or central Nage) people as a

156

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 157

whole. Since Oki, as a topographical term, describes a “nook” or “cranny,” in this context it may well be a disguised reference to human genitalia. 235. Red monkey, pale bronzeback snake ‘O’a to, gala bha A person who behaves badly This is a general deprecation, although apparently one mostly employed in chastising misbehaving children or young people. Nage interpretations thus included a person who behaves childishly and a child trying to behave like an adult – for example, pretending that she/he knows as much as her/his parents. Accordingly, “red monkey” refers to an immature specimen, one whose face is still red (cf. “red child,” ana to, referring a human baby; see also No. 239). However, some evidence suggests the entire expression might also be understood as referring to oddities or abnormalities more generally. Gala bha means “white or light-coloured gala snake” (the Bronzeback Dendrelaphis pictus),” possibly a reference to albino specimens, which some Nage report having seen, or, in the view of two commentators, to relatively pale, immature snakes that become darker with age. In another context (see No. 421) the same phrase may allude to the lighter underside of the snake. On the other hand, the composition of the entire expression suggests prosodic factors, especially when it is considered that in other dialects, ‘o’a to becomes ro’a toro. In regard to adults whose talk suggests immaturity, the metaphor may imply that, like children, such people lack the understanding or experience of adults, so that one should therefore pay them no heed. However, the expression can be used to disparage anyone who incites anger or of whose character or behaviour one disapproves. By the same token, “having a face like a red monkey” (ngia bhia ko’o ‘o’a to) is a more elaborate form of “face of a monkey” (No. 211), another common pejorative. 236. Réndu monkey ‘O’a ‘Édu (dialectal Ro’a Rédu) A skilled climber In central Nage, men of the Réndu (or Rédu) district to the northeast – pronounced ‘Édu in central Nage – have a reputation as skilled climbers. A

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

157

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 158

variant of the metaphor is kebhi ‘o’a ‘Édu, “to adhere, cling onto (a tree) like a Réndu monkey.” 237. Sentinel monkey Ana mono A human spy, scout, or sentinel The term denotes a small monkey that keeps watch from a tree top when other members of the troop enter a field to raid crops. Should humans or dogs approach, the little sentinel sounds the alarm (Forth 2016, 129). Applied to humans, ana mono refers, for example, to a youngster sent to listen in on a meeting or discussion or to attend some other activity, to learn what is said or what transpires. Children (who must of course be old enough to understand the task) are chosen because they can appear to be playing or simply hanging about and therefore, unlike an adult, will likely go unnoticed. The term can also refer to a man who climbs a tree or takes up another elevated position to observe an enemy’s advance. Mono is apparently related to moni, “to watch, observe”; ana is “child” and “person, member (of a collectivity).” 238. Struck by the monkey disease Ta’a gena ‘u’u ‘o’a A person who is visibly startled or nervous or who cannot keep still “Monkey disease” (‘u’u ‘o’a) could more exactly be translated as “spell of the monkey.” Defying any simple gloss, u’u (dialectal ru’u) refers to an illness or physical condition thought to result from a breach of a taboo on stealing, imposed by an owner, mostly of fruit-bearing trees. The operation of the taboo is indicated by a particular icon usually suspended from the tree. Reflecting a set of mystical ideas known throughout Flores (and also on the neighbouring island of Sumba; Forth 1981, 102, 115–16), there are numerous kinds of ‘u’u, and some are named after animals. Someone “struck by the monkey disease” exhibits symptoms reminiscent of the restive, jittery movements of a macaque. As a metaphor, however, the expression refers not to a person actually diagnosed with the illness but to someone who behaves in a way similar to someone so afflicted.

158

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 159

239. Unmoulded monkey ‘O’a mona kewe A person with an unattractive, ill-formed, or odd-looking face The metaphor was described as reflecting both the human-like appearance of infant monkeys and the linked notion that monkey mothers manipulate the faces of their newborns so that, with time, they will grow to look like other monkeys. Although recorded more than once, the metaphor seems not to be widely known and the expression – and perhaps even the belief about monkey practice – could conceivably reflect a misinterpretation of ‘o’a mona kebhi (“a monkey that does not cling to trees,” No. 228). 240. Monkey’s testicles Lase ‘o’a A kind of tree The tree is thus named as the fruit are thought to resemble a monkey’s testicles. Related to Nage lasu (penis), lase is a dialectal term used to the northwest of central Nage and in Ngadha. Comparative Remarks on Mammal Metaphors As is obvious from this and the preceding chapter, some mammals provide vehicles for more metaphors than do others. In fact, 63 percent of mammal metaphors (151 of 240) are accounted for by just five categories. All occurring in at least twenty expressions, these are “buffalo,” “horse,” “dog,” “pig,” and “monkey.” Full figures are set out in table 1. As the table makes clear, domestic (or mostly domestic) mammals provide proportionally more metaphors than do wild kinds. The apparent importance of domesticity is further borne out by the domestic fowl, or “chicken,” which, as is seen in the next chapter, occurs in forty-four metaphors – more than any kind of wild bird and more than any kind of mammal. At the same time, domesticity alone cannot explain metaphorical prominence, as shown by the monkey, which appears in thirtytwo metaphors and is surpassed only by the water buffalo and the dog. Clearly, then, other factors are involved, including, in varying combinations, a more general familiarity (deriving from frequency of observation and

E X C L U S I V E LY W I L D M A M M A L S

159

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 160

Table 1 Totals of metaphors involving different mammals Mainly domestic mammals

Total domestic: 162

Water buffalo

33

Horse

26

Cattle

2

Sheep

6

Goat

16

Dog

35

Pig (domestic and wild)

25

Cat (domestic and wild)

19

Wild mammals

Total wild: 78

Deer

8

Porcupine

5

Giant rat

4

(Smaller) Rat or mouse Shrew Civet Monkey

17 4 8 32

interaction), size, and possible cultural factors. For example, the greater metaphoric value of domestic over wild animals obviously coincides with the greater economic value of the former for Nage. But these are matters better left until later, where they are explored with reference to all animal metaphors (see chapter 8).

160

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 161

5 Talking with Birds

Birds occupy a special place in the symbolic thought of many peoples, including spiritual beliefs, myth, and augury (see Forth 2017a, regarding the etymology of “augury” and “auspice”), and anthropologists may particularly recall the prominence of avifauna in Australian systems of totemism, signalled in Radcliffe-Brown’s (1951, 114) question of “Why all these birds?” It may not be surprising, therefore, that among Nage animal metaphors, only usages employing mammals outnumber those employing birds. Some attention was given to Nage bird metaphors in an earlier work (Forth 2004a, 140–7, 180–96), but by no means were all metaphors incorporating birds treated there, so the present book provides a far more comprehensive treatment of the topic and, moreover, locates Nage usages involving birds within the wider context of animal metaphors generally. Of seventy-two named bird categories that hypothetically could be used as metaphors, forty-nine, thus a good majority, are in fact so used, while twenty-three are not. What may distinguish these “non-metaphorical” birds is discussed at the end of this chapter. Below, English translations of Nage bird categories are listed alphabetically, as are individual metaphors where there is more than one of these. In several cases, the English gloss is a simple form of the name (e.g., “bushchat”) followed by a more specific identification (Pied bushchat). On the whole, it has not proved necessary to provide introductory remarks as was done with individual mammal categories. Where issues of identification, specific features of a bird, or Nage ideas about the species are relevant to its metaphorical uses, these are mentioned in one or more of the individual commentaries, and mostly in the first.

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 162

Of the forty-nine bird categories Nage employ metaphorically, forty-six are folk-generics (e.g., kolo, dove) while just three are folk-specifics (e.g. kolo dasi, Rock dove or pigeon, No. 391), but none refers simply to “bird” – as in English “free as a bird” or “early bird.” This is mostly attributable to the complex character of the Nage word for “bird,” ana wa ta’a co’o, literally “flying animal.” A qualification concerns peti, or ana peti (see Nos. 327–30), whose most specific referent is small finches but which can also refer contextually to a larger grouping of passerine birds and sometimes approaches the sense of “bird in general” (Forth 2016, 165–6). But even in this case the metaphors can be understood as having a more specific kind of bird as their vehicle. For Nage, birds include bats, and, by virtue of the alphabetical listing, it is bats that begin this review of individual bird metaphors.

BATS • MÉTE 241. Flying fox Méte A youngster who frequently vomits Méte denotes large fruit bats of the genera Pteropus and Dobsonia. Although the name can be used for “bats in general,” thus as a folk-intermediate incorporating other named bat categories, in the present metaphor and others incorporating the name, méte evidently refers specifically to flying foxes and, thus, to a particular folk-generic. Also expressed as “eating like a flying fox” (ka bhia ko’o méte), the present metaphor draws on the idea that flying foxes lack an anus, are unable to defecate, and so must expel food waste by vomiting (Forth 2004a, 123–4). According to another interpretation, a child who is “like a flying fox” eats and defecates continually, or defecates immediately after eating, or even at the same time. This of course would appear to contradict the belief about the bats lacking an anus, as would a more recently recorded idea (encountered in 2016) that flying foxes can eat and defecate simultaneously (see also “bat droppings”). Nevertheless, both applications of the metaphor reflect the fact that bats remain suspended upside down and largely motionless during daylight.

162

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 163

242. Flying fox droppings Ta’i méte Something that is spilled or scattered on the ground; a person who spills or scatters things Usually expressed as a simile, the phrase apparently refers more to objects than people and in this respect differs from formally similar usages like “buffalo dung” (No. 6) and “goat droppings” (No. 70). The expression is also curious in relation to the previously mentioned idea that flying foxes lack an anus and thus vomit up excess food. However, in this context at least, ta’i could be understood not as a specific reference to faeces but in the more general sense of “waste.” 243. Flying fox hair Fu méte Fine hair at the back of a person’s neck This is yet another term describing a part of an animal’s body applied to a part of the human body. 244. Flying fox’s elbow Ciku méte A man who is sturdy, firm and solidly built, and tough Since in Nage the possessive is implied when a nominative follows a personal name or pronoun, the expression can also mean “having the elbow of a flying fox.” It thus refers to an individual physical feature and, unlike “flying fox hair” (No. 243), not to part of the human body in general. 245. Living like a flying fox Muzi bhia ko’o méte A person who is shiftless and lacks energy; someone who likes to stay out or travel or is otherwise active at night and who sleeps during the day Given the habits of bats, the metaphor is self-explanatory. Because bats, as it were, invert day and night, as well as rest in an inverted position (with their heads below and feet above), one might well expect the present metaphor to

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

163

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 164

refer to people suspected of being witches, who are reputed to travel at night and sleep during daylight. As explained elsewhere (Forth 2009b), however, Nage deny any association of bats with witches. With reference to people who simply stay out late – or “night owls” in the English idiom – I was told that, for méte (flying fox), one might substitute gébu or ‘ighu, the names of two smaller kinds of bats. 246. Leaf-nosed bat Bo dinga A person with flared nostrils or an animal, especially a buffalo, with the same feature As a reference to a category of bats, bo dinga is a highly marginal taxon, excluded from the usual Nage tripartite classification of bats (as méte, gébu, and ‘ighu). It is, however, sometimes described as a “kind of ” ‘ighu (see No. 247), and since few people are familiar with its animal referent, it could be described as a dead metaphor. Nage employ the term mostly in friendly banter, for example when referring to men whose nostrils flare when they inhale tobacco smoke. Bo means “snout.” In the Keo region, to the south of Nage, Leafnosed bats (Hipposideridae) are similarly called iru ndinga (iru is “nose,” cognate with central Nage izu). A buffalo with flared nostrils is called bhada bo dinga. 247. Eyes of a tiny bat Ana mata (or lie mata) ‘ighu A person with small, narrow, or half-closed eyes or someone who does not see clearly ‘Ighu names several species of very small bats (Microchiroptera). Also applicable to people who, from tiredness, cannot keep their eyes open, in one sense the expression recalls English “blind as a bat.” 248. Tiny bat ‘Ighu A person who quickly changes course or otherwise acts in an irregular manner

164

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 165

The metaphor is motivated by the rapid and irregular flight of tiny bats, readily observable each evening around twilight. As discussed elsewhere, ‘ighu very occasionally enter dwellings, and such a bat alighting inside a house is considered highly inauspicious (Forth 2007a). 249. Cricket [and] tiny bat, Cico méca. See No. 497 250. Flying fox jackfruit Mo méte A small tree The plant is not a jackfruit but a similar tree, apparently the cempadak (Artocarpus integer). According to Nage, the tree may be so named because flying foxes can eat the relatively small and thin-skinned fruit whereas they cannot eat much larger jackfruit.

BUSHCHAT Pied bushchat • Saxicola pracata • TUTE PÉLA 251. Bushchat seaward on top of a stone Ana tute lau tolo watu An unmarried pregnant woman Lyrics of a song, the metaphor is one of several where small birds represent human females. A small passerine bird, the Pied bushchat is most commonly encountered in central Nage in lower-lying areas to the north of the main area of habitation, as is consistent with the specification of its location as “seaward” (lau). Also located in this region are a hill named Wolo Tute (“bushchat hill”) and the settlement named Mala Tute (“bushchat plain”), the successor to a former hamlet simply named Tute. What has motivated the selection of this particular bird for the present metaphor is not obvious from its form or habits, and Nage interpretations revealed no consensus. But it is nonetheless interesting that the second component of the bushchat’s complete name, péla, can refer to sexual transgression (Forth 2004a, 22, 101, 214n6), more fully designated as sala péla (sala, “error, mistake”).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

165

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 166

252. Bushchat chirps Tute ci cea A time of day As Nage remark, the bushchat calls before sunrise or very early in the morning, even before the friarbird (see Nos. 347–50). Used as a proverb rather than simply as a reference to a time of day, a more elaborate version of the metaphor is “bushchat cries ci cea (expressing) a desire for daylight” (tute ci cea ola mo da).

BUSHLARK Australasian bushlark • Mirafra javanica or a pipit Anthus spp. • ANA GO 253. Legs like a bushlark Taga bhia ko’o ana go Someone with very thin, spindly legs The phrase is especially applied to young children but is also used in banter among adults. Bushlarks and pipits are small birds with thin legs; they also characteristically run along the ground, thus possibly drawing attention to the legs and fixing these as part of the metaphorical vehicle. In English metaphor, a person with skinny legs is similarly described as “sparrowlegged” (Palmatier 1995, 361) or, less specifically, as having “bird legs” (28–9). 254. Pipit (or bushlark) strikes the gong Ana go dhégo go Sound of thunder A lyric from a planting song, the expression is metaphorically equivalent to ana ja paka laba (No. 59), with which it can be conjoined. By all indications, the appearance of ana go in this context is not motivated by physical features of the bird but purely by the homonymy of go (“gong”) and an unexplained part of the bird’s name, as well as their prosodic effect when combined with dhégo.

166

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 167

CHANNEL-BILLED CUCKOO • Scythrops novaehollandiae • MUTA ME 255. Channel-billed cuckoo Muta me A shiftless person dependent on others for food The metaphor can more specifically refer to someone who gives orders to others but does no work himself; thus one woman used it to describe a shiftless husband who orders his wife about. Motivating the metaphor is the parasitic habit of the Channel-billed cuckoo, which lays its eggs in crows’ nests. Such parasitism, however, is not completely understood by Nage, who claim that young cuckoos as well as young crows hatch from eggs laid by crows and are accordingly fed by crows. Where muta me refers to people who instruct others but are themselves idle, the metaphor would appear further motivated by the cuckoo’s significance as a chronological sign, indicating the time when people must begin working their fields, and thus its characterization as the “great foreman” (see No. 258), a value advertised in all other metaphors that incorporate this bird. 256. Channel-billed cuckoo, you shout a great deal but your throat is sore in vain Muta me, kau ta’a ‘éghe ‘éghe foko o héde A person whose efforts or contributions are not recognized or rewarded Occurring as a lyric of a planting song, the expression refers to the cuckoo’s calling early in the wet season, indicating the time people should be preparing their fields for planting. Despite this useful service, however, the cuckoo does not later benefit from human cultivation as it does not eat maize or other wet season crops – thus the parallel with people who expend much effort in some task but are not rewarded for their efforts. In the planting song, the Channel-billed cuckoo is paired with the koel (see also No. 259), another parasitic cuckoo that calls early in the rainy season, while both birds are contrasted to cockatoos and crows (Nos. 305, 307).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

167

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 168

257. Channel-billed cuckoo, you speak well Muta me kau ta’a sezu pawe Someone who provides useful information This too is a lyric in a planting song that recognizes the importance of the cuckoo’s call for the organization of agricultural tasks. Although the metaphorical gloss may risk over-interpretation, the cuckoo is nevertheless represented here as an agent that “speaks” in a timely manner, providing good news (sezu pawe). Sezu, translated as “speak,” refers to vocalization in humans as well as birds and a variety of other animals, while the calling of birds is more specifically designated as polu (“to call, cry”). 258. Cuckoo above takes charge, moves (others) to action Muta me zéle kéku A person who takes the lead in some activity, especially one from which he/she him/herself will not necessarily benefit Zéle, “above, higher up,” specifices the Channel-billed cuckoo’s call as usually being heard overhead, while the bird is in flight. As noted earlier, the cuckoo’s cry in effect summons people to work in the fields, and for this reason Nage also name the bird the “great foreman” (mado méze), a metaphor that, it is worth noting, has a human as its vehicle and an animal as its referent. 259. The Channel-billed cuckoo has already cried out, the koel has already called Muta me négha ‘éghe, tou ou négha polu The time of the year by which people should be ready for planting Lyrics from a planting song, the parallel expressions again refer to the significance of birds as chronological signs. Like the Channel-billed cuckoo, the koel, another species of cuckoo, vocalizes just before the beginning of the rainy season and the time, usually in mid- to late October, when cultivators should be ready for planting. The song as a whole derides lazy people who do not have their plots ready at this time. In the parallelism, conjoining the names of the two birds with two roughly synonymous verbs reflects not only the similar behaviours of the two cuckoos, but also prosodic effects, especially

168

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 169

in regard to the assonance of ou (the second part of the koel’s onomatopoeic name) and polu (“to call, cry out”) and the alliteration produced by négha (“already,” indicating completed action) and ‘éghe (“to call out, shout”).

CHICKENS, DOMESTIC FOWL • Gallus gallus • MANU The many chicken metaphors reflect a generally close relationship between these birds and humans connected with the former’s status as the main, and traditionally the only, avian domesticate. Fowls are regularly employed as sacrifices, in which context their entrails are inspected as auguries revealing the will of deceased relatives, ancestors, and other spiritual beings. And chickens are always included as part of bridewealth and other goods given by wifetakers (collectively designated as tua manu nio, “toddy, chickens, [and] coconuts”), a practice reflected in several metaphors in which the birds are identified either with wife-takers themselves, married women, or unmarried females destined to become members of wife-taking groups. As this should suggest, to call people “chickens” in Nage has a quite different and rather more positive ring than it does in English, in which “chicken” is, among other things, a slighting reference to a coward. For this reason, I thought of employing the more technical “domestic fowl” in translating individual Nage metaphors, which also gets around the absence from English of a general term for the bird that is not age specific (and perhaps not gendered since “chicken” can specify the female bird and is moreover used in English metaphorically for a woman or young girl). In the end, however, I decided to retain “chicken,” as this is now widely employed colloquially for the species as a whole. 260. A brood of chickens attracts chickens, Moko manu moko pani manu. See A flock of cockatoos attracts cockatoos (No. 304) 261. Black hen (as) mother, red cock (as) father Ine susu mite, ame lalu to Two parties (individuals or groups) who trace descent from the same ancestor or ancestral couple

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

169

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 170

Figure 18 Tethered cock with owner (No. 260)

Although Nage employ susu and lalu for females and males of a variety of non-mammals, in this context the terms are understood as referring specifically to domestic fowls. The expression concerns sharing of common and often quite distant origin, and in both phrases the colour terms connote great age. Paralleling susu and lalu, the terms for human parents reflect the standard binary composite ine ame (“mother [and] father”), denoting not only parents but also ancestors of both sexes (cf. ebu, “grandparent, ancestor,” where sex is not distinguished). It is also noteworthy that in both ine ame and susu lalu, the female term always comes first.

170

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 171

262. Chicken that pulls on (another’s) tail Manu ta’a edo bhédo A person who detains or holds another person back Bhédo, here translated as “tail,” refers more exactly to the pygostyle, the fleshy protuberance located at the end of a bird’s caudal vertebrae and known colloquially as the “parson’s nose.” The metaphor is employed, for example, when someone needs to leave the house to go somewhere but is prevented from doing so by the arrival of a guest.1 263. Chicken with a stunted tail Manu we’o pubu A woman with short frizzy hair that cannot be wound into a bun The phrase occurs as part of a teasing song (pata néke), the complete lyrics of which are: “chicken with a stunted tail, up on the roof ridge, preens its wings, hair (or feathers) like millet chaff ” (manu we’o pubu, mena tolo ghubu, sui pau ta’a bele, fu bhia kuta wete). Fu denotes both human hair and the feathers of birds. 264. Chicken with feathered legs Manu taga labu Someone wearing clothes that are too long or large The phrase denotes a fowl with feathers growing down to the feet, evidently a mutation. Labu is “shirt, upper body garment” but may originally have referred more generally to a body covering (cf. the Indonesian cognate kelambu, “mosquito net”). According to Nage, the expression can describe someone wearing clothes on parts of the body, such as the upper torso, where they are more decorative than necessary, or to any sort of clothing, including waistcloths or sarongs, that are too large. But the most common reference is to men who wear Western-style trousers (now worn regularly by most younger men) that are palpably too long. In addition, the assessment can be contextual; for example, people working in fields normally wear their waistcloths hitched up to the knees (to prevent them getting dirty or wet), so that anyone wearing a cloth down to the ankles can be cynically described as a “chicken with feathered legs,” implying that the person is not prepared to work.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

171

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 172

265. Chickens without a coop Manu kodo mona An impoverished family without a house of its own and thus reduced to living with others or in a field hut. A kodo (“coop”) is a portable enclosure of plaited bamboo in which chickens are placed at night and where hens lay and eggs are hatched. As the phrase can apply to people who live permanently in field huts (kéka), “chickens without a coop” can more specifically refer to people who lack a house (sa’o), that is, a dwelling located inside an established village (bo’a). As a proper name, Kodo Mudi denotes the “ancestral” house (sa’o waja) of the clan Mudi in the village of Tiba Kisa (see Forth 2004a, 90, plate 5.1). Kodo also means “pod,” as in kodo mo, “seedpod of jackfruit” (mo), and further refers to a traditional women’s garment, a sort of blouse that covers the breasts. 266. Chickens of god Ana manu déwa Humans in general as beings who will inevitably die Ana manu denotes both “chicks” and “chickens” (in the sense of young fowls). As discussed in chapter 2, the metaphor refers to humans particularly as mortal beings and occurs in songs of mourning in which singers proclaim “we are god’s chickens” (kita ana manu déwa). Déwa (divinity) refers to the being Nage designate more completely as Ga’e Déwa, a creator deity and supreme being nowadays regularly, although not invariably, identified with the god of Christianity and Islam (Forth 1998, 195–216). The succeeding lines of the song speak of this divinity as “coming down to gather (his fowls) together and never letting any escape; counting and never making a mistake” (déwa ko poi mona be’o lozi; déwa ko baca mona be’o sala) – meaning that everyone must eventually die (Forth 2004a, 190). Except for the different animal vehicle, “we are god’s chickens” is virtually identical to the Nuer metaphor translated by Evans-Pritchard (1956, 12) as “we, all of us, have the nature of ants in that we are very tiny in respect to God,” a usage Evans-Pritchard compares to “Isaiah’s likening of men to grasshoppers” (see Isaiah 40:22) – also in relation to the Abrahamic god.

172

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 173

267. Cocks fighting Manu papa ta Two people fighting or engaged in a brawl The phrase can be applied to two men, two women, or a man and a woman (usually a husband and wife). By contrast to many other Indonesian peoples, Nage appear never to have engaged in cock-fighting as a traditional pastime, but cocks will of course fight naturally to establish dominance. Ta is “cockspur” or “to spur, stick with a spur”; papa expresses reciprocal action. 268. Continue giving chickens Dhemu manu Marrying a deceased wife’s sister Dhemu more literally means “to connect.” The phrase complements dhungu tua, “keep the toddy flowing” (dhunga is “to tie, retie, e.g., the two ends of a broken string”) and alludes to a wife-taker’s obligation to provide chickens and palm wine to a wife-giver (cf. No. 276). By marrying the sister (or similarly close female relative) of a deceased wife, a man thus continues the relationship with his deceased wife’s group and more generally the connection of marriage alliance between his group and the group of the wife’s brother. 269. Crowing cocks that answer one another, Manu kako papa walo. See Bleating goats that hear one another (No. 68) 270. Hatch out (chicks) like hens, Mesa bhia manu. See Give birth like pigs (No. 123) 271. Hen gathering chicks under her wing Manu wodo ‘eko A husband who gains paternity of a child fathered by another man The phrase is often expressed simply as wodo ‘eko and refers to the man’s actions as much as the man himself. Meaning “to gather together” wodo has the further sense of “to protect”; ‘eko is contextually synonymous. As Nage

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

173

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 174

recognize, the expression describes a mother hen sheltering chicks under her wing and might therefore suggest a woman who is pregnant with a child. Yet the phrase is invariably applied to a man, more specifically a man who marries a woman who is carrying the child of another man, often a man who has previously engaged her as a “mistress” (ana bu’e). In this situation people still recognize the paternity of the biological father while accepting the woman’s husband’s claim to the child as a fait accompli, especially as it is he who will have paid bridewealth for the woman before the birth and usually before the pregnancy is even apparent. Activities of hens and chicks inform the English metaphors “mother hen” (someone who is overly protective) and “taking (someone) under one’s wing,” both used for men as well as women, and thus demonstrating that in English as in Nage hen metaphors need not denote only female humans. (Other examples are listed below.) 272. Hen that lays eggs in another hen’s nest Manu telo ‘oghe A person who disturbs, trespasses against others; someone who unnecessarily duplicates the actions of another Although applied more generally, especially in the first sense, the phrase refers to a man who “cuckolds” another, in which respect it is worth recalling that the English word refers to the parasitic habit of birds of a different sort, the cuckoos. 273. Hen that lays eggs in various places Manu telo loa A person who freely engages in illicit relationships Telo is both “egg” and “to lay (eggs),” while loa means “overflowing, excessive, beyond bounds” – here alluding not to the number of eggs but to the variety of places in which eggs are laid. The metaphor can refer to a woman who consorts with and has children by several men or a man who maintains several mistresses simultaneously. It also recalls the general theme, expressed in several mammal metaphors (e.g., No. 71), whereby illicit sexual relationships are depicted as being prosecuted outside of human habitations. As Nage remark, sometimes hens, even when provided with a coop (kodo), will lays eggs in several places – on one day in one spot and on another day in another

174

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 175

spot. Such hens can lay in forest, rock crevices, and occasionally also in a coop, but not consistently in any single place. I first recorded the metaphor, in the same meaning, as manu telo ghoa, “hen that lays eggs like a monitor lizard,” but this is apparently a misinterpretation (or “folk etymology”) of the present expression. Nevertheless, a man who employed this version remarked how female monitors (ghoa) lay their eggs in the forest as disorderly hens will sometimes do, and it may also be significant that one of the monitor metaphors (No. 445) has much the same meaning. 274. Hen that jumps (moves) from coop to coop Manu kadi kodo People who do not (yet) have a house of their own and so stay temporarily with a number of others The metaphor reflects the same identification of chicken coops with houses expressed in No. 265. The expression may also apply to someone who has a house but nevertheless frequently stays with other people. 275. Hen’s egg Telo manu The human calf This can be classified as another term denoting a “part” of an animal employed as the exclusive term for a part of the human body. In English, the “calf ” is similarly designated by an animal name, but whether the anatomical application ultimately reflects an animal metaphor, perhaps through Old Norse, is uncertain. 276. Lost fowl Manu mele A deceased married woman Complementing “palm wine (toddy) that has disappeared” (tua pota), the combined phrases refer to goods owed to a woman’s brother at her death by her surviving husband or sons. As both chickens and toddy are among the goods wife-takers, including in-married women, are obliged to bring

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

175

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 176

whenever they visit wife-givers, the expression involves metonymy since Nage consider a married woman as having become a member of a wifetaking group and no longer belonging to her natal group. For the same reason, “lost chicken” can be more generally interpreted as an allusion to any deceased wife-taker. Nage regard the death of either a married woman or her husband as a potential breach in a relation of affinal alliance that must be repaired or given recognition by the obligatory mortuary payment also called manu mele (Forth 2009c). As noted previously (chapter 2, note 4), representing wife-takers as chickens recalls the identification of humans in general as “chickens of god” (No. 266). 277. Mouth like a chicken’s anus Mumu bhia bui manu Someone who talks incessantly According to Nage a fowl’s anus continuously moves inward and outward. As the expression applies especially to someone whose constant talking covers all topics and accordingly maintains no confidences, it closely resembles a shrew metaphor (No. 198). 278. Our chickens cluster together, other people’s chickens fly away Manu kita wodo pida, manu ata co léla People will (or should) keep their own affairs to themselves (since) outsiders who learn of them will advertise them far and wide This is a proverb advising people to keep private matters private. Referring to a hen gathering chicks under her wing, wodo is explained earlier (No. 271). Although meaning “to fly” in other Florenese languages, here léla apparently means “across” or “to cross (a boundary).” 279. Red cock (as) father, Ame lalu to. See Black hen (as) mother (No. 261) 280. Sea fowl cries pitying itself (or mourning its body) Ana manu mesi polu kasi weki The soul of a recently deceased person

176

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 177

Nage explain the phrase as reflecting an analogy between a human life and a seabird that, unusually, wanders far inland but must inevitably return to the sea. In the same way, “a person’s earthly sojourn is limited: a human must eventually die, and the soul must return to its place of origin, which is divinity” (Forth 2004a, 89). The expression is thus comparable to “chickens of divinity” (No. 266), and just as Nage do not conceive of human souls as actually taking the form of chickens, so they do not consider them ever being embodied as sea birds. In other words, the usage does not reflect any specific belief about souls; rather, the identification of the soul, or a person, with such a bird “appears to derive entirely from [this] particular poetic idiom” (ibid.) – a song of lament in which it can complement ana kolo dasi (No. 391; see also Forth 2004a, 190). On the other hand, one of several places to where Nage say deceased souls proceed after death is indeed the sea. Although in related languages the term specifically denotes either large waders or sandpipers and similar small shorebirds, central Nage “sea fowl” (manu mesi) refers to any sort of vagrant sea bird unusually encountered far inland, and it does not name any particular kind of bird, even less any kind of chicken (manu). As a term occurring specifically in a mortuary context, it may be relevant that mesi, “sea,” recalls mesu “(to feel, express) pity.” Though ana can mean “child, immature specimen” (see ana manu, “chick”), in the present phrase it appears to describe a member of a collectivity and so has an individualizing effect (Forth 2016, 54–6) – as it does in a number of other bird metaphors. 281. Speckled fowl, mottled (or dappled) horse; spotted cat, drawn circles Manu ke’o ja kéla, meo déto uki léke Occupants of a territory of mixed composition Such a territory is divided into fields with diverse owners, in contrast to an area continuously owned by people of a single clan or village. Among the phrases complementing “speckled fowl” only uki léke is not an animal metaphor, denoting instead circles drawn on the ground into which pits of the fruit of a giant liana (léke) are tossed in a traditional game. The entire metaphor draws on the similarity between, on the one hand, the variegated patterns characteristic of all these things – in the first instance the plumage of a

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

177

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 178

bird (see figure 19) and in the second and third the pelage of mammals – and the diverse affiliation of parties holding rights to different parcels of land within a single area. Manu ke’o (“speckled fowl”) also refers to a supernatural being (see No. 297), but this sense has no relevance in the present context. Although the English term is not an animal metaphor, the Nage usage may nevertheless recall English “motley.” Historically associated with the parti-coloured costume of a jester, in the metaphor “motley crew,” “motley” describes something “of a varied character” or “incongruously varied in appearance or character,” while “motley” as a noun denotes “an incongruous mixture” (Oxford English Reference Dictionary). Although the ultimate source is unclear, the English word may be a form of “mote,” meaning a speck or spot. And also worth noting is “mottle,” which the same dictionary describes as probably a back form of “motley” and defines as “an irregular arrangement of spots or patches” and, verbally, as “mark with spots or smears of colour,” thus “mottled.” 282. Stripping (skin off) a chicken’s leg Kou kuku manu Doing something without reward, or getting a disappointing result Although Nage offered a variety of interpretations for this metaphor, the general sense is doing something in vain or without result or return. Everyone with whom I discussed the usage recognized its derivation from the fact that, when one strips a fowl’s leg (the lower, featherless part, not to be confused with the “drumstick”), one finds only bone and no meat beneath the skin. The expression itself is curious because kuku denotes the hoof of an ungulate and, by extension, the limbs of an ungulate carcass. As Nage themselves recognize, therefore, chickens (manu) strictly speaking do not have kuku; hence kuku manu can itself be understood as metaphorical. Recorded applications included: a person who appears capable but whose performance eventually proves disappointing; someone who is usurped by another and receives no part of an inheritance; and someone who contributes to bridewealth payments but receives no portion of the wife-giver’s counter-gift in return. In all cases the metaphor can be used in self-reference; thus a person can say “I (we) have stripped skin off a chicken’s leg” (nga’o [kami] kou kuku manu), indicating that nothing, or very little, has been obtained in a situation in which some return could reasonably have been expected.

178

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 179

Figure 19 Male speckled fowl (No. 281)

Although obviously not identical, the Nage metaphor may recall English “hen’s teeth,” part of a fowl that, like a “chicken’s hoof,” does not exist and that denotes something so scarce as to be virtually non-existent. Regarding the referent it may be additionally reminiscent of “flogging a dead horse,” meaning doing something that cannot possibly be effective. 283. “You” fowl Manu miu Someone who makes serious accusations against or is unduly critical of others

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

179

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 180

Manu miu refers to a nocturnal sound resembling “miu, miu,” which Nage interpret as a manifestation of a witch (see No. 296). However, miu is also the second person plural (“you”), so that describing someone as “like a ‘you’ fowl” means that she or he is inclined to accuse people of wrong-doing – and possibly even of being a witch. Qualifying the inclusion of this usage as a chicken metaphor is a common Nage denial that manu miu refers to any kind of bird, claiming that nocturnal “miu” sounds can equally be made by other creatures, including horses. In another view, the name may denote a bird, but of no particular kind or of a kind unknown. More certainly, it does not name any kind of chicken, and whatever its precise referent the category seems most closely comparable to “highland quail” (No. 397), another term metaphorically incorporating a bird name and similarly referring to an ominous nocturnal sound. One man interpreted manu miu as a reference to a woman who squeals at a man’s advances. Although this interpretation may be idiosyncratic, it nevertheless agrees with the use of “chicken” as a metaphor for women in other expressions. 284. Young cock Manu kako bake An adolescent male whose voice is breaking The term also denotes a growth stage in domestic fowls, when young cockerels begin to crow (kako) but are not yet able to do so with full volume or vigour. As a reference to a young person, it may recall English “spring chicken,” though this can refer to young people of either sex (and perhaps especially a woman). Sometimes used to mean “lacking fluency” (in a language), bake has the more general sense of “unproficient,” “(still) unable to perform a task well.” 285. Young hen Manu moka A woman requested in marriage A metaphor used in marriage negotiations, “to request a woman in marriage” is usually expressed as pai manu moka. Equivalent phrases include pai ipi

180

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 181

bola, “request a woman’s container for betel and areca nut,” and pai wini ngani, “request seed for planting.” In the context of everyday activities, all these items are associated with women and can therefore be understood as metonyms, as women are largely charged with both the care of poultry and planting fields. As noted elsewhere, chickens are also among the animals Nage employ as bridewealth, and while they are therefore not transferred with brides (unlike pigs), once incorporated into this group a woman becomes a wife-taker and then is responsible for raising chickens to give to her natal group and other wife-givers of her husband’s family. In regard to mammals as well, the qualifier moka specifies a mature female animal that has yet to give birth. 286. Young hen or young cock? Moka ko lalu? A girl or a boy? This is a conventional question used when enquiring after the sex of a newborn child. As in other idioms combining the two genders – for example, ine ame, “mother [and] father, parents” – the female term is normally given first. Nage apply lalu to male specimens of all non-mammals, and moka to young females of a variety of animals, but in the present metaphor the terms are invariably understood as referring to domestic fowls. 287. Chicken leech Mate manu A small kind of leech, a terrestrial leech (smaller than “buffalo leech,” a larger, aquatic leech) This is one of three animal names employing “chicken” to distinguish a kind smaller than contrasting kinds. The other two are given immediately below. A comparable use of English “chicken” to specify things that are “small or trivial” has been noted by Ammer (1989, 32–3), who records “chicken lobster” for a lobster weighing less than a pound; “chicken pox,” which she describes as “a mild disease compared to the smallpox it once was thought to resemble”; and “chicken weed (fifteenth century) or chickweed,” for “a tiny wildflower, only a few inches high.” Ammer further observes how “in the 1830s in America

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

181

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 182

chicken feed meant small change, or a small amount of money, stemming from the fact that chickens can be fed corn and wheat grains too small for other uses,” adding that “the less polite chicken shit originated during World War II in complaint against petty, disagreeable military rules.” In current English, this last term is still used to refer to something of little value, pathetically small, or of poor quality (see also “chicken-feed”). 288. Chicken monitor Ghoa manu Small monitor lizard Probably referring to immature specimens, the term denotes a putative kind of Water monitor (Varanus salvator) contrasting to a larger kind named ghoa ba’o (unanalyzable). 289. Chicken viper Hiku manu Small pit viper The referent is a putative kind of Island pit viper (Cryptelytrops insularis) contrasting to a larger kind, but, as in the previous metaphor, the creatures in question are by all indications merely young pit vipers. 290. Chicken ginger Lea manu A kind of ginger (Zinziber sp.) Referring to the smallest sort of ginger, “chicken” is used here in the same way as in the three animal names above (Nos. 287–9). 291. Chicken’s claw thorn Ga kungu manu A thorny plant Possibly a cactus (and in that case imported by Europeans in or after the sixteenth century), the plant is so named because the thorns resemble the talons of a domestic fowl.

182

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 183

292. Cock, male fowl Manu lalu A kind of tree The wood of the tree is used as building material. No one I asked could suggest why the tree is so named. Verheijen (1990) lists the same name in Ngadha as referring, in different dialects, to Enicostemma axillaris or Cyperacus pilotus. 293. Chicken herb Fau manu A kind of plant Commonly found growing near villages, the round leaves of this unidentified plant are pounded, mixed with salt, and given to both chickens and larger livestock to treat intestinal worms, and can also be placed on wounds. Nage do not apply fau to any other plant, and I was unable to obtain further clarification of the name. 294. Chicken rattan Ua manu A small kind of rattan Small and with thin stems, Nage contrast this rattan to a larger sort named ua méze (“big rattan”), thus providing a further instance of manu as a reference to a small kind of plant or animal. In reference to animals, ua also means “innards, entrails,” so the plant name is a homonym of ua manu, “chicken entrails,” the component of sacrificial fowls Nage use as an augury. A somewhat different sense of ua occurs in ua koka (No. 345). For Ngadha, Verheijen (1990) provisionally identifies the rattan as Daemonorops sp. 295. Chicken’s tongue Lema manu A sort of grass A plant that is plentiful only in the rainy season, Nage describe the leaves as resembling a chicken’s tongue. Verheijen (1990) lists lema manu in Lio as the name of Hedyotis corymbosa.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

183

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 184

296. Miu fowl Manu miu A nocturnal sound As noted earlier, although incorporating manu (chicken) the name does not denote any sort of bird or other animal but primarily refers to a mysterious and ominous sound. Also, while Nage associate the sound with a witch out to cause harm, it does not designate any clearly conceived category of spiritual beings. Mistaking the sound for a human voice calling miu, the second person plural, people might be inclined to respond “who are you?,” but were anyone to do so, the speaker and his family would then be cursed (Forth 2004a, 83–4). The metaphorical application of manu miu to a person is described above (No. 283). Interestingly, in Lio ule miu (ule, “bird, creature”) does indeed appear to name a particular bird, possibly the hawk-owl Ninox scutulata, and one that, moreover, is credited with making the same inauspicious sounds Nage attribute to manu miu. 297. Speckled fowl Manu ke’o A spiritual being Illuminating its name, the being is described as a large snake with a cock’s head, and in this and other respects is largely comparable to another supernatural creature called naga. Details are discussed in Forth (1998, 88–98). 298. Chicken (young fowl, chick) Ana manu Larger sacrificial animal (especially a water buffalo) This usage was recorded in Forth (2004a, 90), where I also mentioned kodo (coop) as a figurative reference to kopo, an enclosure in which buffalo are kept. The opposite of hyperbole – illustrated in the context of sacrifice by the Nuer practice of designating a cucumber as an ox as well as by Nage “trough buffalo,” denoting a pig (No. 32) – calling a large animal a chicken is a conventional understatement.

184

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 185

Since Nage regularly pair tua, “palm wine (or gin),” with manu when speaking of bridewealth or other goods regularly given by wife-takers to wifegivers, a parallel idiom is the metaphorical use of “palm wine” (tua or tua ae; ae is “liquid”) to refer to the entirety of bridewealth goods, as in “we wish to bring you palm wine” (kita mo edi miu tua), an expression employed by the groom’s group when negotiating a marriage. As noted, the principal bridewealth valuables are in fact large livestock and, more specifically, water buffalo – hence, like “chicken,” this too is a conventional understatement. Just once I recorded bhada manu, “chicken buffalo”; however, this refers not to a buffalo but to a chicken slaughtered in place thereof, and so is comparable to “trough buffalo.” 299. Sick chicken Manu béwe Insufficient bridewealth, a very small amount of bridewealth Complemented by “palm wine that has gone bad” (tua senge), the phrase can be used to understate or trivialize an amount of bridewealth given, but it also refers to an amount which, though small, is nevertheless sufficient to establish a marriage and testify to the wife-taker’s good intentions. Like other expressions (Nos. 268, 276, 298) the metaphor draws on chickens and palm wine as invariable components of wife-takers’ gifts. 300. Chicken’s beak Ngi’i manu Growth stage of maize The term applies when maize plants have just emerged above ground to a height of about one centimetre, or the length of a chicken’s beak. 301. Chicken’s thigh Pa’a manu Growth stage of cultivated plants The term refers to shoots that have grown to the height of a chicken’s thigh.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

185

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 186

302. Mother hen hut Kéka manu wodo A small hut with thatch reaching almost to the ground, thus resembling a sitting or a sleeping hen with wings resting on the earth (wodo) As manu wodo more specifically refers to a hen thus disposed with chicks sheltering under her wings (see No. 271), the image further evokes a representation of such a building as a place of protection. Huts in this form can be used as dwellings, in which case Nage describe them as especially secure places to spend the night. However, very small structures of the same form constructed with just two posts rather than four, and erected beside a village house, are used solely as places to store trophy horns of sacrificial water buffalo. 303. Cocks crow Manu kako Times at which cocks crow during the night The more elaborate phrase ana kisa kobe manu kako, “child from the middle of the night (and) the crowing of cocks,” metaphorically refers to a child conceived outside of a recognized marriage and whose paternity is therefore unknown or disputed – or, as one might say, “in the dark.” Nage identify “darkness” with lack of knowledge or mental clarity in a way similar to English and other languages (see, e.g., meze, “dark,” also meaning “in the dark” – i.e., “benighted,” “befuddled”). A longer phrase incorporating “crowing cocks” (manu kako) complements a friarbird metaphor (No. 335), and in this context reveals an identification with humans in general. A comparable usage in which the activity of fowls serves as a chronological sign is “chickens descend (from their roosts)” (manu pozo), referring to the time around 5:30 a.m.

COCKATOO Yellow-crested cockatoo • Cacatua sulphurea • KAKA KEA or KEA 304. A flock of cockatoos attracts cockatoos, the cockatoo flies up (into the sky); a brood of chickens attracts chickens, the chicken wanders off down on the ground

186

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 187

Woe kea woe pani kea, kea co imu wa’a zéta; moko manu moko pani manu, manu loza imu zale awu People typically consort only with people of the same kind Although much reduced since the mid-twentieth century and locally extinct in many places, cockatoos maintain a place in Nage metaphors. In three of the expressions below the birds’ significance lies in their (former) status as invaders of cultivated fields, especially fields of ripening maize. The present expression, a proverb encountered in the lyrics of circle-dance songs, recalls the English proverb “birds of a feather flock together.” Translated here as “attracts,” the verb pani has the further senses of “to bring, carry along,” “to draw,” and “to influence, encourage (others to follow one).” In song, a succeeding line expresses pity for the Brahmany kite, which, according to the Nage interpretation, is all alone and longs for the company of cockatoos and chickens but is unable to join them, partly because they prefer their own company but also because they have all gone away. The cockatoo has flown up into the sky (to join other cockatoos) while the chicken has wandered off (to join other fowls). The metaphors are evidently motivated by the occurrence of both cockatoos and domestic fowl in flocks and, although commentators did not remark on this, by their complementarity as strong flyers and ground-dwelling birds, respectively. 305. Cockatoo and crow are the most fortunate of all (birds) as they remain silent but are the first to get star maize Kasa kasa ko’o ngata kea ne’e ha, ta’a heta pau ko’o ngata ulu mewi holo dala. People who gain benefit from something, even though (unlike others) they have expended no effort and made no contribution Another proverb, the expression comes from a planting song in which the cockatoo and crow (ha) are explicitly contrasted to the Channel-billed cuckoo and Common koel (Nos. 256, 382). The former pair are described as “most fortunate” of all birds because they feast on ripening maize, whereas the cuckoo and the koel receive nothing of the crop, even though their vocalizations, heard early in the wet season, assist cultivators by signalling when people should have fields ready for planting. In contrast, crows and cockatoos are silent when the last two “unfortunate” birds begin calling.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

187

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 188

306. Cockatoo’s wings Bele kea A person who changes his or her mind or is otherwise inconsistent The expression can be applied, for example, to someone who, in regard to a specific matter, says one thing on one occasion and something quite different shortly afterwards; criticizing such a person, Nage might thus say mae bhia bele kea, “do not be like the wings of a cockatoo.” The metaphor draws on the fact that, when gliding or coming into land, cockatoos will tilt one wing upward and the other downward in quick succession. Hence the Nage usage draws on a particular sort of alternating motion in precisely the same way as do metaphorical applications of English “waver” (“shake, quiver”), for example, in reference to human equivocation, vacillation, or unreliability. In the context of traditional pugilistic competitions (etu), Nage employ “cockatoo’s wings” in a more positive sense to describe parrying movements employed to avoid an opponent’s blows. At these competitions, men who dance to the accompaniment of chanting (mélo) imitate the bird’s method of flight with outstretched arms, while one group of chanters sings o bele kea bele kea (“oh cockatoo’s wings, cockatoo’s wings”). This is then answered by a second group of men, occupying the other end of the field, who reply li’o lénga li’o lénga, a phrase also describing a cockatoo’s flight and a similar alternating movement (li’o, “to lie, sleep face upwards”; lénga, “to lie face downwards”). 307. Cockatoos and crows Kaka ha A large gathering of people; people who engage in profligate expenditure Somewhat unusually, in this metaphor the complete form of the cockatoo’s name is abbreviated as kaka. A variant, lea kaka ha, “to discard (things) for cockatoos and crows,” in effect describes leaving food for birds that, through their depredations on cultivated fields, are quite capable of feeding themselves and thus refers to people who expend their resources wastefully, including, in one interpretation, giving food to people who do not need it or who do not reciprocate one’s assistance. Somewhat more positively, the metaphor can allude to conspicuous consumption, describing people wealthy

188

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 189

enough to slaughter large numbers of animals, regardless of cost. Including the reference to a large gathering of people, all applications of the metaphor draw on the habits of both kinds of birds of forming large flocks, descending in large numbers on fields of ripening maize, and consuming maize rapaciously, with many kernels falling to the ground – thus, as it were, being wasted. Although crows as well as cockatoos have virtually disappeared from central Nage, people still remember the phrase wula kaka ha, “month of the cockatoo and crow,” a reference to the time of the year when maize ripens, about late February or early March. 308. Crest of a cockatoo Odu kea Head hair that sticks up in the centre of the head, a person with such hair This is one of several metaphors linking features of particular birds with human head hair, in which respect it should be noted that Nage fu refers both to the hair of humans and mammals and to a bird’s feathers. Although the cockatoo is not the only crested bird known to Nage, the cockatoo’s crest is relatively large and the bird is able to raise and lower it. As the phrase is apparently applied only to men’s head hair, the usage may date from the midtwentieth century, when men began cutting their hair. 309. Scaring off cockatoos, driving away monkeys Ea kéka, oha ‘o’a Repelling (human) invaders As kéka is “cockatoo” in dialects to the northeast, the appearance of this name, in place of kea or kaka, suggests an origin outside central Nage. The phrases describe subordinates, formerly including slaves, charged with guarding a territory against invasion or encroachment by outsiders. Cockatoos and monkeys provide a ready metaphor for human invaders or trespassers because the animals are (or, in the case of cockatoos, were) among the most destructive of crop pests. At the same time, prosody is clearly reflected in matching the animal names with verbs. Ea more exactly means “to shout (in order to drive something away).”

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

189

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 190

COUCAL Lesser coucal • Centropus bengalensis • TOTO 310. Coucal with a rotten anus Toto ‘obo mou A person who claims illness to avoid work The metaphor reflects a Nage belief that the coucal, a large ground-dwelling cuckoo, suffers an anal infestation of worms or maggots (ule) during the wet season but, as it were miraculously, always recovers during the dry season. The wet season is the part of the year that requires most agricultural labour, hence the application of the expression to a malingerer. Nage claim coucals do indeed develop an “infested anus,” which they describe as smelling like diarrhea or a rotting chicken carcass (Forth 2004a, 128). Although the source of the idea is unclear, it could represent an actual infestation of bird parasites. On the other hand, a folktale recorded in Lio (some one hundred kilometres to the east of Nage) in which the coucal is teased by a bird of prey for having a “rotten anus” (as the bird is also in a Nage story, Forth 2017a) was explained as referring to the bird moving its buttocks, like a “wriggling worm,” whenever it vocalizes, thus possibly suggesting another source of the idea. In the Nage story the coucal is taunted for having a “rotten anus” not by another bird but by a monkey. Rather than the metaphor as ordinarily employed by Nage deriving from its use in this tale, however, the mythical episode simply reflects the conventional metaphor.

CROW Large-billed crow • Corvus macrorhynchos • HA Although crows – both the Large-billed crow and the endemic Flores crow (Corvus florensis; Nage héga hea) – are prominent among the birds Nage identify with witches, this association finds no reflection in any crow metaphor. In fact, crows occur in just four metaphorical usages and in two of these they share the focus with another bird, the cockatoo. 311. Cockatoo(s) and crow(s), Kaka ha (or Kaka ne’e ha). See No. 307

190

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 191

312. Crow bat Méte ha A flying fox with dark pelage Nage describe the crow as the blackest of birds. The use of “crow” instead of “black, dark” (mite) in reference to the flying fox’s pelage possibly reflects the Nage classification of both creatures as birds. If so, then the metaphorical (or, more specifically, metonymic) name is partly contingent on folk taxonomy. 313. Crow droppings Ta’i ha A kind of tree Also named (lo) dola ha, “crow’s Adam’s apple (tree),” this is a large tree whose wood is used as timber. The motivation for the metaphorical name is unclear.

CUCKOO-SHRIKE Black-faced cuckoo-shrike • Coracina novaehollandiae • CIO WOZA 314. When the cuckoo-shrike calls, only tears will fall Cio woza sezu, lu mata me’a bedhu News of a death always evokes sorrow A proverb heard mostly in planting songs. For Nage, the cry (or “voice,” sezu) of the cuckoo-shrike manifests the soul of a dead relative come to call another to death and is therefore a sign that someone has just died or is about to die (see No. 355, regarding a substitution of the cuckoo-shrike for the goshawk). However, the bird’s appearance can signify other things (Forth 2004, 86–7). According to one of several formulations, if a cuckoo-shrike flies from one end of a village to the other along the landward-seaward axis (zétalau), then a death is indicated, whereas if it flies across a village, from one of the longer sides to the other (mena-zale), then this presages the arrival of a guest. While sezu and bedhu display assonance, the English glosses “call” and “fall,” quite coincidentally, rhyme.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

191

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 192

DOLLARBIRD Common or oriental dollarbird • Eurystomus orientalis • KAKA DAZA 315. Dollarbird Kaka daza A person with a raucous laugh A person who is “(like) a dollarbird” or “laughs like a dollarbird” (tawa bhia ko’o kaka daza) is someone whose laugh resembles the bird’s harsh cry (Coates and Bishop 1997, 386), replicated in the first component of its name. (Nage interpret kaka in kaka kea, the name of the Yellow-crested cockatoo, in the same way, but the two birds are not included in a single folk-taxon.)

DRONGO Wallacean drongo • Dicrurus densus • CÉCE 316. Drongo’s tail We’o céce Head hair ending in the back in long, whispy strands; a person with such hair The expression is usually applied to men’s hair. Classified by Nage as a “witch bird,” one of several species thought to manifest angry witches, the drongo is a noisy, aggressive bird with black plumage. Its most distinctive physical feature, however, is its long bifurcate tail, which informs two of the three drongo metaphors. 317. Like a drongo’s broken tail Bhia na’a we’o céce beta, A person who changes topic “Broken” (beta) refers to the the drongo’s bifurcate tail, which gives the appearance of having been split in two. The phrase was described as referring, more specifically, to a person who, shortly after someone has introduced a topic, digresses or begins talking about something else – or specifically in view of the “broken” tail, something “unconnected” – possibly in order to deliberately change the subject.

192

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 193

318. The drongo has something, the friarbird does not Ana céce nabu ne’e, ana koka nabu mona Someone has something, another does not Nage were unable to provide a complete exegesis of this expression, both a proverb and a lyric in a planting song, but one man interpreted it as an exhortation to share, noting that, according to Nage values, a person (here represented by the drongo) who has something should share it with people who have nothing (represented by the friarbird). Empirically, the combination of the two species probably reflects the similar characters of drongos and friarbirds, both noisy and aggressive birds with raucous cries. At the same time, a prosodic factor is suggested by the assonance of céce (drongo) and ne’e (“to have, to be present”) and of koka (friarbird) and mona (“no, not”). The insertion of ana (“child”) before the names of the birds provides another example of the contextual use of this term, not to specify an immature specimen of an animal but instead to individualize the zoological category.

DUCK 319. Duck scooping up everything Bébe tolo sogho A voracious, undiscriminating eater who consumes all available food One of several metaphors used to describe or mildly rebuke people who are considered greedy, the relevant image is a duck shovelling up food with its bill. 320. Walk like a duck La’a bhia ko’o bébe A person with a waddling gait Bébe (duck) can be reduplicated in this expression as bébe bébe. The phrase may be applied more often to women than to men and was said usually to refer to someone who walks slowly and laboriously owing to infirmity caused by injury, illness, or advanced age, or simply because a person has very short legs. The source of the metaphor is domestic rather than wild ducks (bébe

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

193

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 194

ae, “freshwater” or “river ducks”); as commentators remarked, wild ducks can move quickly, both bipedally and in flight. As keeping ducks is a practice introduced in the twentieth century, the expression is evidently of recent coinage. Nevertheless, it is a point of interest that both English-speakers and Nage compare waddling in humans to the method of bipedal motion characteristic of Anseriformes – an apparently ineluctable similarity.

EAGLE Various species (see Forth 2004a, 20) • KUA or KUA MÉZE 321. Eagle calls seaward from the top of a lontar palm, pitying the father (man) who died before his time Kua no’i lau lobo koli, mesu ame ulu mata po’i Mourners lamenting the death of a man Described by Nage as the largest of birds (the optional component of the name, méze, means “big”) and as one of the “witch birds,” eagles are less prominent in Nage metaphors than might be expected, although the point applies equally to other birds of prey. The present expression forms part of the lyrics of a song of mourning and appears to be motivated mainly by a resemblance between the high-pitched cries of eagles and other raptors and the keening of mourners. It might also seem relevant that Nage associate a variety of raptorial birds and their vocalizations, especially when heard at night, with witches and other malevolent spirits, which in turn they regularly identify as the agents of human deaths. But this interpretation does not clearly fit with the referent of the present metaphor. Although the expression specifies a male death, Nage do not associate eagles exclusively with men. A metaphor commonly complementing “eagle calls seaward” is “goshawk cries upstream” (No. 355), in reference to which I offer further analysis of both. Although the total expression reveals instances of assonance and rhyme, these do not include the eagle’s name (kua) and hence cannot be a factor motivating the bird’s selection as the vehicle of this metaphor.

194

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 195

322. Eagle peering (staring) at a chicken Kua déni manu Someone who looks intently at a person or state of affairs in order to assess a situation, possibly to seek an advantage The expression more particularly describes an eagle perched high in a tree, preparing to swoop down on a fowl that is not aware of the raptor’s presence or attention. The metaphor can also be used to criticize a person who stares for a reason unknown or who looks on without taking action – for example, when practical assistance might be expected. 323. Eagle owl Po kua The largest kind of owl (Tyto spp.) As a term distinguishing large kinds of animals within more inclusive categories, kua occurs in two other metaphors (Nos. 324, 325). “Eagle owl” is the common English name for Bubo bubo, the largest European owl. Although this is a different species that does not occur in Indonesia, the similarity in naming is worth remarking nonetheless. 324. Eagle pig Wawi kua A variety of wild pig As kua in this context has other interpretations (Forth 2016, 97–8), the inclusion of this metaphorical name is provisional. Nevertheless, the pigs were once described as being named after eagles owing to their ability to “fly,” that is, to leap into and cling onto vines and tree branches (see No. 483). 325. Eagle porcupine Kutu kua A large kind of porcupine Nage contrasts this kind to a smaller kind named kutu pudi (see No. 174).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

195

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 196

ESTRILDINE FINCH • Lonchura spp. PETI or ANA PETI, Amandava amandava • BIO 326. Ana bio (finch) moves up and down, ana bao moves to the left and right Ana bio bido bido, ana bao bado bado A number of people working together The referent is provisional. “Ana bio” is heard in work songs, including songs performed while hauling wood and breaking new ground – both tasks performed by a number of people working in concert. In this context, some commentators identified the term as referring to a small passerine bird, and, as recorded elsewhere (Forth 2004a, 17), the simpler form, bio, may distinguish the Red avadavat Amandava amandava, a distinctively coloured finch. In central Keo, the cognate mbio denotes a more general category of small birds, corresponding to Nage peti or ana peti, while in Keo metaphor mbio, as a bird name, refers to a large number of people coming together with a common purpose (Tule 1998, 100). On the other hand, ana bao (or bao) does not name a bird and most likely functions in the present expression simply as a phonological contrast to ana bio. Insofar as bido and bado refer to movement in opposite directions, other factors motivating bao include assonance with bado combined with the comparable assonance of bio and bido, and the overall alliterative effect of the four elements in combination. Indeed, in contexts in which the lyrics are sung – people working in concert where coordinated movement is important – the rhythmic quality of the phrases is probably more significant than their actual metaphorical content. 327. Little red munia up on the side of the volcano Ana peti to mo zéle lima lobo (Referent uncertain) Although the focal referent of ana peti is munias and other Estrildine finches, a status now being usurped by the recently arrived Tree sparrow (Passer montanus), the term denotes a variety of small birds and in some contexts can even mean “bird in general.” Mentioned in a children’s song, “little red munia” is not a standard folk taxonomic name. However, Nage

196

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 197

sometimes interpret the phrase as describing ana peti jata (“Brahminy kite munia”), the Pale-headed munia Lonchura pallida, whose plumage is indeed mostly reddish. 328. Bird areca Heu peti Smaller sort of areca nuts Areca is the palm Areca cathecu, the nuts of which are chewed with betel fruit or leaves. 329. Bird droppings Ta’i peti A kind of banyan tree (Ficus spp.) According to one local interpretation, the tree is so named because, as a parasite, it grows on other trees, its seeds then falling on these just as do bird droppings (together with which the seeds may indeed be deposited). However, since this equally applies to other trees of the genus Ficus, why the name specifies a single kind of banyan remains unclear. 330. Birds urinate (grass) Peti cio (ku peti cio) A kind of grass with small flowers As small birds (peti) are said to use the grass (ku) as nesting material, the name could reflect the image of birds, sitting in such nests, urinating on the grass. In both this and the preceding metaphor (No. 329) peti should be understood as a general term for small passerine birds.

FALCON Peregrine falcon • Falco peregrinus • BELE TEKA 331. Tongue like a falcon (or a falcon’s wing) Lema bhia bele teka A sharp-tongued person, someone whose speech is dangerous and causes others great distress

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

197

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 198

Designating the Peregrine, the swiftest of falcons, the name bele teka means “sharp wing”; thus in this expression the term can be glossed either as “falcon” or “falcon’s wing.” Even so, the focus is clearly on the bird’s wing, for it is not the falcon’s tongue that is considered “sharp” – only the tongue of a human whose tongue is compared to the Peregrine’s wing. Nage moreover describe the falcon as killing prey not with its talons or bill but by severing their heads with its sharp wing (Forth 2016, 258), hence the motivation for the metaphor is obvious. Insofar as falcons do not in fact kill prey with their wings, the metaphor appears to be founded on an incorrect interpretation of the bird’s wing shape, an error enshrined in the bird’s name. As one man remarked, the metaphor refers to people whose words can harm others and even cause fatal illness and so eventually kill them. As such, it sometimes describes a person who issues a curse. More direct and, Nage say, “coarser” ways of describing an ability or propensity to curse include ngi’i le’e, lema teka, “teeth that are sharp, tongue that injures,” and wiwi bai isi, lema bai teka, “lips exceedingly full (containing too many words), tongue extremely sharp.” An alternative to the last is lema ba’i lebo, “tongue that is too fertile.” In the first expression le’e (qualifying “teeth”) was described as a dialectal term synonymous with Nage teka, “sharp,” by an informant who remarked how metaphors often combine a mixture of local and external terms. In central Nage le’e means “bow” (the weapon).

FANTAIL • Rhipidura spp. • CEKA 332. Fantail does not want to agree Ana ceka bhia ngazo A fickle woman who quickly changes her mind As its English name suggests, fantails are small passerine birds whose most distinctive feature is the way they characteristically spread out their tails like a fan (see figure 20). The present metaphor is heard in the lyrics of a song in which, in the following line, the bird is further described as “hobbling to the left and right” (ceka pi’u pebha pebha). This characterization probably reflects the habit of the Brown-capped fantail Rhipidura diluta – the usual if not the sole referent of ceka – of quickly wagging its tail from side to side (Coates and Bishop 1997, 454), an apt symbol of indecision or ambivalence.

198

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 199

Figure 20 Fantail (No. 332)

333. Fantail is present at noontide, (but) the stubtail does not want to address (the bird) Ana ceka leza, ana bama bhia mega (Referent uncertain) Occurring as lyrics in a planting song associating several kinds of birds with parts of the day, the phrases conceivably refer to a person who is clearly present but whom another does not wish to acknowledge. Both the fantail and stubtail are small passerine birds encountered in daylight. But neither is specifically associated with midday, either in Nage symbolism or ecological fact, and while the name of the fantail (ceka) is palpably linked with the noontide (leza) by virtue of assonance, the opposition of the two birds seems mainly to reflect their contrasting morphology. Whereas the fantail has a prominent tail, the stubtail, as attested by the bird’s English moniker, has

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

199

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 200

Figure 21 Man with “Fantail’s Tail” hair (No. 334)

virtually no tail at all, and Nage characterize it as “tailless.” As explained elsewhere (Forth 2017b), the stubtail is an omen bird whose call is especially inauspicious when heard around noon, and this idea is possibly relevant to the bird’s not greeting the fantail at noontide. At the same time, one commentator described the stubtail’s attributed reluctance as abnormal since these birds will vocalize whenever anyone encounters (mega) them. In the second phrase bhia (a homonym of bhia, “like, resembling”) renders the negative, “not to want, to refuse to,” a synonym of the more familiar bau, which is used in dialects spoken to the east and south of central Nage. 334. Fantail’s tail We’o ceka Frizzy or very curly head hair, a person with such hair Hair described as like the tail of a fantail tends to stick or spread out and so is not easily secured in a knot or bun, nor easily combed.

200

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 201

FRIARBIRD Helmeted friarbird • Philemon bueceroides • KOKA In symbolic contexts Nage know the friarbird mainly as the principal herald of the dawn and as the bird that in origin mythology champions the present order of the world, including, most notably, the regular alternation of daylight and night and the origin of death and birth. The bird’s garrulous cries can also be interpreted as conveying specific messages and as possessing oracular value (Forth 2004a, 99). Thus, in a children’s song composed during the colonial period, the friarbird is depicted as instructing youngsters to attend school and become Christians (ibid., 181). Like other nectar feeders, friarbirds are noisy and quarrelsome birds and, while fighting over blossoms, will attack one another as well as other birds. This aggressive character and the bird’s vocal prominence inform the majority of Nage friarbird metaphors. 335. A friarbird cries suddenly, the cocks immediately know (to crow) Koka sedho sa ghedho, manu kako be’o pau Some things necessarily precede others, certain things cannot happen unless something else comes first A proverb that, in effect, admonishes people not to sleep too late and to start agricultural labours early. The first phrase was originally recorded as koka sedho sa wedho (understanding wedho as “briefly, [in] an instant,” Forth 2004a, 184). If not more correct, ghedho (suddenly; see tau ghedho, “to startle”) is at least an acceptable variant. Either way, the expression refers to the early morning calling of both friarbirds and domestic cocks and a notion that cocks begin to crow only after the first friarbird has called. (Cocks of course crow several times during the course of the night, but this refers to the cock crow around sunrise.) Be’o, “to know,” also means “to be able,” thus further suggesting that the friarbird’s cry enables the cocks to crow. Hence the phrases convey the general sense of one thing necessarily preceding another and further suggest that people too should follow the order of nature and, like the cocks, should rise not long after hearing the friarbird’s morning call. An alternative to the second phrase is manu kako to’o walo, “cocks crow waking up again,” thereby implying yet another metaphorical identification of domestic fowls and human beings. The combination of sedho (generally understood as “to call out” but apparently meaning, more specifically, “to

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

201

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 202

utter a brief cry”) and ghedho (“suddenly”) reveals the influence of rhyme; in other expressions the friarbird’s vocalizing is expressed instead with polu (“to call, cry”) or sezu (“to vocalize, speak”). 336. Chest like a friarbird Kasa bhia koka A thin person The phrase refers especially to a man with a thin chest, with little muscle or fat and whose ribs show. The expression can be counted as a variant of the general friarbird metaphor, listed below. 337. Friarbird Koka Someone who is thin but also energetic and loquacious The usage draws on the Nage idea that the friarbird, a scrawny bird whose calls are loud and repetitious, owes its slender build to the energy it expends in continuous vocalization. Variant interpretations include: a thin, longnecked person; someone who is always on time; and a messenger or bringer of news. The second refers to the value of the friarbird’s calls as chronological signs, as the birds always call noisily just before sunrise and sunset (see Forth 1992; Forth 2007b). In a further application, “friarbirds” applies to combatants in pugilistic competitions (etu) who grab and hold onto one another as friarbirds do when they fight with wings and feet. Nage describe friarbirds as fighting with such vigour that they are sometimes knocked off their perches and fall to the ground. 338. Friarbird cries “iko ako” and gets (whatever it wants) with the utmost ease Ana koka iko ako tei noa noa talo A person of good fortune who is always successful in his or her endeavours Heard in a planting song, this expression immediately follows one discussed earlier in which the friarbird is contrasted to the drongo (see No. 318). As mentioned elsewhere (Forth 2004a, 182), the present metaphor is consistent not only with the friarbird’s palpably aggressive character but also with the

202

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 203

Figure 22 Friarbird (No. 337)

bird’s more general use as a representation of a “vociferous and persistently vocal person.” As a proverb, it may recall the English aphorism “the squeaky wheel gets the grease.” Replicating a call that, if not squeaky, has been characterized as “clanking” (99) and comprised of “harsh, metallic whistles or cackles” (Simpson and Day 1993, 226), iko ako denotes the cry of the friarbird. Although talo usually means “to be unable (to do something),” in the present expression it functions as an intensifier when preceded by a reduplicated modifier (in this case noa, “easy, easily”). 339. Friarbird does not reveal the news, oriole has already learned by itself Ana koka mona toda, ana leo me’a be’o Someone who already knows something without being informed As a proverb, the phrases proclaim that people do not always need others to tell them things in order to know them. While the selection of the friarbird is fully consistent with this bird’s vocal prominence and the notion that its

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

203

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 204

cries can convey messages, the metaphorical deployment of the oriole appears ornithologically more arbitrary and mainly to reflect the virtual rhyming of leo (“oriole”) and be’o (“to know”). On the other hand, orioles are noisy birds with a variety of loud calls (Coates and Bishop 1997, 413) that, as Nage recognize, feed in the same trees and sometimes fight with friarbirds, so these factors too may contribute to their metaphorical co-occurrence. 340. Friarbird has yet to obtain anything, Ana koka nabu mona. See The drongo has something (No. 318) 341. Friarbird immediately gets stuck in Koka siba sowa An impulsive person who acts directly in response to a stimulus The phrase is a more elaborate variant of “friarbirds squabble” (No. 343) and, like the simpler statement, can be used in palm-tapping rituals. Siba means “directly, straightaway, immediately.” In other contexts, sowa, here translated as “to get stuck in,” conveys several senses, including “break (off, into),” “prise open,” and “strip, peel (off)” – as friarbirds are wont to do to flowers when feeding on nectar. Accordingly, a specific application of koka siba sowa is a man who, on seeing an attractive woman, immediately accosts her or even forces himself on her. 342. Friarbird that knocks down blossoms Koka ta’a wa’u wonga A person who always shows up when something attractive is available Consistent with a readily observed behaviour of these birds, the specific source of this metaphor is a friarbird spotting a tree in blossom and proceeding to feed on the nectar with such haste and vigour that flower petals get knocked to the ground. Other commentators related the expression more to the bird’s noisy vocalizations and interpreted it as referring to people who talk a lot, just as friarbirds make a lot of noise when they spot blossoms. 343. Friarbirds squabble, Koka sowa. See Sunbirds throng (No. 412)

204

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 205

344. Neck like a friarbird Foko bhia ko’o koka A long-necked person This is a more specific variant of “friarbird” (No. 337). Although not extremely long, the thin neck of the friarbird is quite distinct and, in relation to its fairly large head, is certainly reminiscent of the neck of a gangly human. 345. Veins of a friarbird Ua koka A wiry, energetic person; a person who is thin or rangy but nevertheless strong As an anatomical term, Nage ua (corresponding closely to Indonesian urat, “vein, sinew, tendon, nerve”) refers to several “lines” in the body, but in this context it seems mainly to denote the veins – veins and arteries being more pronounced on lean bodies. As Nage recognize, the metaphor reflects the thin, scrawny appearance of the friarbird combined with its energetic and aggressive nature. In a related sense, ua denotes the entrails of chickens and livers of pigs used in augury, evidently by reference to the “lines” in these organs from which various meanings can be divined, and in ua koka one might discern an allusion to the bird’s “good fortune” expressed in other friarbird metaphors. Particular instances of the expression I recorded include “you have a body like the veins of a friarbird, you are mischievous” (kau weki bhia ua koka, kau maku bhalo), words of anger addressed to misbehaving children; and “just like a friarbird’s veins” (bhia na’a ua koka kema), describing a slim but solidly built person who works energetically. 346. Friarbird ant Wéwo koka A kind of large ant This is a folk-taxonomic name understood by Nage as reflecting the long “neck” of the ant and thus its resemblance to the friarbird. The meaning of wéwo is uncertain. According to one man, wéwo may originally have been

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

205

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 206

féwu, describing the extreme irritation caused by the bites of certain ants (cf. Ngadha févu, “continuous itching on the hands and feet,” Arndt 1961). Koka might then be construed, not as the name of the bird, but in its other sense, as “disgusting, nauseating,” in which case the name would not be a bird metaphor at all. But this speculative interpretation appears to be less widely known and accepted than the one linking the ant and the friarbird. 347. Friarbird calls in the morning, fantail shows (that it is) midday Ana koka polu poa, ana ceka pea leza A reference to association of different birds with different parts of the day, organizing the daily round The phrases occur in the lyrics of a planting song. The fantail’s notional association with the middle part of the day is discussed earlier (No. 333). In the present expression, the association contrasts with and complements the friarbird’s significance as a herald of the dawn and the bird’s association with both the beginning and ending of daylight (see No. 350). 348. Friarbird calls waking (people) up Koka sedho tau bugu to’o Time in the early morning when people should be getting up This is another chronological usage referring to the early morning cries of friarbirds and, more specifically, the birds’ earliest cries, heard before sunrise. As a reference to the friarbird’s call, sedho occurs in another metaphor (No. 335), which the present usage closely resembles. 349. Friarbird heralds the dawn, Imperial pigeon points to the daylight Ana koka ola pea poa, ana zawa ola pea da Daybreak as indicated by the calls of these birds From the lyrics of a song, this is yet another reference to the friarbird’s cries as heralding a new day, in the present instance complemented by a reference to the similar significance of the calls of the Imperial pigeon (Ducula aenea).

206

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 207

350. Friarbird orders, reserves the sun Koka na’u leza Late afternoon, when the sun is low Another chronological usage, the phrase conveys the idea that, by calling at this time, friarbirds arrange with the sun to meet early the following morning since the birds begin vocalizing as the sun is setting, just as they do before it comes up again. Although the sun is represented as an anthropomorphic being in Nage myth, as in some respects is the friarbird, how far these images apply in the present context is unclear, and there is no indication that Nage understand this phrase as meaning that, like a sentient being, the sun is actually instructed by or enters into an agreement with the calling birds. Although others disagreed, one man claimed that the phrase actually describes friarbirds as “making an arrangement” not with the sun but with humans who, by way of their calls, they inform that the sun will soon set and that they should soon return from their fields. Usually equated with Indonesian pesan (“to order, instruct, command,” “to reserve [e.g., a space]”), na’u has the more reciprocal sense of “making an appointment or agreement” with someone, especially to meet at a particular future time. Here glossed as “sun” (more completely named mata leza), leza can also mean “day, daylight.” 351. Friarbird night Kobe koka A day deleted from a lengthy ritual undertaking; to perform a rite on a reduced scale Illuminating this usage is the mythological desire of the friarbird that night and day should alternate rapidly. Employed in several ritual contexts, the phrase can refer to speeding up a lengthy undertaking by dispensing with a day of inactivity that should normally intervene between component rites of a ceremonial sequence. To expedite this, participants pretend to sleep for a time, then someone imitates a cock’s crow and everyone rises and continues as though a night had passed (Forth 2007b, 498).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

207

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 208

FRUIT DOVE • Ptilinopus spp. or Flores green pigeon • Treron floris • BOPO 352. Fruit dove flies down from the volcano, flies and alights not missing a single morning (and) sees a banyan tree with leaves full of fruit Ana bopo co zéle mai lobo, co ko’a mona peta poa tei nunu ta’a li’e wale wunu A person continually drawn to someone of the opposite sex whom he or she therefore visits constantly The fruit of banyan trees are a preferred food of Fruit doves, as of other pigeons and doves. The phrases are among the lyrics of songs sung by men and women while working in fields and exemplify the genre named pata néke, involving reciprocal teasing between the two genders. The verses are sung in turn by men and women. Depending on who sings, the Fruit dove is a man who continually visits a woman or a woman who is constantly drawn to a man. The banyan fruit is a person of the opposite sex whose house (or “tree”) the dove visits each morning or, according to one commentator, a number of people of the opposite sex to whom a person is drawn. The lyrics can be followed by others, which refer to a Fruit dove and an Imperial pigeon together (see No. 353). 353. Fruit dove swallows (fruit) whole, Imperial pigeon goes for overripe (fruit) Ana bopo ta’a tolo beghu mogo, ana zawa dole te’a lala Young people “consume” young people (of the opposite sex), older people choose older people (of the opposite sex) Also exemplifying the genre named pata néke, these phrases complement the previous metaphor (No. 352). As commentators explained, in the present expression “Fruit dove” refers to young people, including virgins, while “swallowing whole” alludes to enthusiastically consuming fresh fruit. “Imperial pigeon” then refers to an elderly widow or widower, without teeth, who is obliged to consume fruit that is rotten ripe (te’a lala). As is common in this sort of performance, the gender of the subject and object varies according to

208

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 209

which sex is singing. Assonance is revealed in the series bopo (Fruit dove), tolo, and mogo and again in zawa (Imperial pigeon) and lala. The apparent connection between doves and heterosexual love evident in this and the preceding expression may recall English metaphors. As Christine Ammer (1989, 161) remarks, “doves have long been thought to be amorous birds, and the adjective lovey-dovey has been used with that meaning since the early 19th century.” She then further suggests that this association “may come from the birds’ billing and cooing – the touching of beaks and soft murmuring noises – which also have been transferred to human behavior to mean kissing and whispering endearments” (emphasis in original). In both of the Nage expressions, however, the doves are described not as being attracted to others of their kind but to fruit. Thus the metaphors have their source in bird behaviour of a different sort – although one expressing an even more widespread, and probably universal, conceptual metaphor, linking food with sex and eating with sexual intercourse. 354. Fruit dove merely makes threats, Fruit dove appeals to goshawk Bopo ugha agha bholo, bopo wito ne’e sizo (Referent uncertain) These are successive verses from a nonsense rhyme, sometimes sung (see Forth 2004a, 195, for the full text). Although also belonging to the genre named pata néke, Nage I questioned were unable to identify specific referents. In the same context, the crow (ha) too is described as making threats (ugha agha), and the distinctive flight of the cockatoo (kea bele li’o lénga, see No. 306) also receives mention.

GOSHAWK • Accipiter spp. • SIZO 355. Goshawk cries upstream from the top of a coconut palm, pitying the mother whose death was premature Sizo io zéta lobo nio, mesu ine ulu mata ‘ibo Mourners lamenting the death of a woman

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

209

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 210

The goshawk’s name, sizo, means “to attack from the side,” an apt description of the hunting method of this fast and low-flying bird of prey. The expression complements “an eagle calls seaward …” (No. 321). Taken together, the two expressions reveal several parallelisms, zéta//lau, “upstream//downstream”; koli//nio, “lontar palm//coconut palm”; ame//ine, “father (man)//mother (woman)”; mata po’i//mata ‘ibo, both denoting an early death; and of course, kua//sizo, “eagle//goshawk.” Lontar palms, it should be noted, grow only in dry, coastal regions and therefore outside of central Nage territory, whereas coconut palms occur in all regions. However, the association of the two birds with the two trees is ornithologically arbitrary, and in the case of the goshawk is evidently motivated only by the assonance of the bird’s name, its cry (io), and the name of the coconut (nio; see also the rhyme of io and nio). In the present expression, sizo io (“goshawk cries”) can be replaced by mole sio, a dialectal name for the cuckoo-shrike, in central Nage called cio woza. As noted, a vocalizing cuckoo-shrike can be a death omen (No. 314) as contextually can cries attributed to raptorial birds, while sio in the dialectal name of the cuckoo-shrike, in relation to both nio (coconut palm) and also ‘ibo, maintains the prosody otherwise initiated by sizo (“goshawk”).

GROUND-DOVE Emerald ground-dove • Chalcophaps indica • MUKE 356. Crop (craw) of a ground-dove Héke muke Breasts of an adolescent girl Usually expressed as a “(having) breasts like a ground-dove’s crop,” the phrase describes a young woman whose breasts are just beginning to develop. The Emerald ground-dove is a relatively small dove. But since héke denotes the crop of any bird (including chickens), the occurrence of muke is evidently motivated more by prosodic considerations and, specifically, by the occurrence of ke as the final syllable of both words. A somewhat derogatory usage, “breasts like a ground-dove’s crop” is one of several similar phrases Nage employ in hunting chants, where they direct abuse at game animals and their spirit owners.

210

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 211

357. Ground-dove and (Spotted) dove up in the hills Zéle wolo muke ne’e kolo People seeking the company of others like themselves The phrase occurs in a song, where it complements “quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands” (No. 392) and where both pairs of birds are described as “living in friendship side by side” and “always traveling together” (Forth 2004a, 184–5). Comparable to the English proverb “birds of a feather flock together” and its biblical precedent “Birds dwell with their own kind” (Ammer 1989, 139–40; see also I Corinthians 15:39), the pairings are motivated by morphological and behavioural resemblances between members of each pair. The two species of doves both belong to the Columbidae, whereas quails and junglefowl are both members of the Phasianidae. In addition, the contrast of “hill” (wolo) and “lowlands, plain” (mala) accords with differences between the two birds with regard to habitat, although since some doves classified as kolo occupy both regions whereas others (the subclass named kolo dhoro, the Barred dove Geopelia maugei) are normally found in lowlands, the rhyme of kolo and wolo is apparently a further factor. In the present expression, “ground-dove” (muke) is sometimes replaced by “Imperial pigeon” (zawa; see below).

HERONS and EGRETS • Ardeidae • GASO TASI and O AE 358. Large heron Gako tasi A person who is exceptionally tall Both herons and egrets are long-legged birds, and this expression is largely synonymous with both No. 359 and another metaphor, incorporating the similarly long-legged waterhen (kuku raku, No. 416). A tall person can also be described as simultaneously resembling both a heron and an egret (bhia gako tasi o ae). Some Nage, however, distinguished “large heron” as referring specifically to a person who is not only tall but also more generally large-bodied, and “egret” as describing a tall, thin person – a distinction that accords with morphological differences between herons and generally smaller egrets.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

211

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 212

359. Egret or small heron O ae A long-legged person The metaphor is often expressed as “(having) legs like an egret” (taga bhia o ae). Ae is “water” and has presumably been added to distinguish the bird from other referents of o, a lexeme that, as a bird name, has evidently been reduced from oro and orong (cognates designating the same species in other Flores languages) by the disappearance of /r/ in central Nage.

IMPERIAL PIGEON Green imperial pigeon • Ducula aenea • ZAWA 360. Friendly (only) with mute Imperial pigeons, conversing (only) with wild doves Moko ne’e zawa ngongo, io ea ne’e kolo béla A person who is banished and thus separated from all human kin and companions Addressed to someone who is told his or her only companions will be wild pigeons and doves, the phrases form part of a traditional curse banishing a person from his or her home settlement. Zawa ngongo denotes a kind of imperial pigeon Nage distinguish from the Green imperial pigeon (Ducula aenea, simply named zawa) on the ground that it hardly vocalizes, making a mumbling sound like a person unable to speak (ngongo is “mute”). Further described by Nage as possessing dark plumage and not flocking, unlike the Green imperial pigeon (which occur in flocks of several dozens), the bird in question may be the Dark-backed imperial pigeon Ducula lacernulata (Coates and Bishop 1987, 327, 328). The fact that the exile’s avian companions include birds that are mute evidently emphasizes the extent of his/her ordained isolation. At the same time, conversing only with doves deemed unable to speak, an ironic contradiction, provides the sort of contrast within an overall similarity that is typical of Nage parallelistic idioms. Modifying kolo (small doves of the genera Streptopelia and Geophilia), béla, “feral,” is not part of the proper name of any bird and in this context merely underscores the occurrence of the doves in places beyond human habitation.

212

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 213

361. Egg of an Imperial pigeon Telo zawa An only child A child without siblings – a relatively rare and therefore remarkable occurrence among Nage – is described as ana bhia telo zawa, “child like a pigeon’s egg.” The usage reflects the fact, recognized equally by Nage and international ornithologists, that Green imperial pigeons, the specific referent in this case, usually lay just a single egg. While this behaviour sufficiently motivates the metaphor, the pigeon’s reproductive habit is further consistent with the appearance of the Imperial pigeon in a myth concerning the origin of death and also birth (Forth 1992, 2007b). In the myth, the pigeon – in contrast to its opponent, the friarbird (koka) – argues that humans, who at this point do not yet know death, should not be prolific and that couples should have no more than a single child. 362. Imperial pigeon goes for overripe (fruit), Ana zawa dole te’a lala. See Fruit dove swallows (fruit) whole (No. 353) 363. Imperial pigeon points to the daylight, Ana zawa ola pea da. See Friarbird heralds the dawn (No. 349) 364. Imperial pigeons alight Zawa ko’a Twilight, the time of day around 5:30 p.m. The exact reference is the time just before sunset, when Imperial pigeons alight in trees to roost for the night. Reflecting the belief that forest spirits (nitu) live an existence similar to humans but do everything in reverse, a more elaborate version of the phrase is zawa ko’a nitu dhou, “Imperial pigeons alight (while) the spirits go down to their fields.” The hour denoted is of course the time of day when people return from their fields, having “gone down” (dhou) around sunrise. In this respect, then, the activity of the pigeons coincides with that of humans – both “going home” at the same time – which thus suggests a further metaphorical component of the expression. Consistent with the idea that spirits are on the move at this time, Nage maintain that young children should not fall asleep at this hour. Parents

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

213

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 214

therefore say to children “Imperial pigeons are roosting (so) do not sleep” (zawa ko’a ana mae nade), and to protect them from harm from mobile spirits, they mark their foreheads with a charcoal smudge. Nage also regard zawa ko’a as the best time to go line fishing for eels, as this is the time when eels feed.

JUNGLEFOWL Green junglefowl • Gallus varius • KATA 365. Face like a junglefowl cock Ngia bhia kata lalu A man with a striking, animated face A wild bird, the junglefowl closely resembles its close domestic relative, the chicken Gallus gallus, a descendant of the red junglefowl that still occurs wild in parts of western Indonesia. One commentator described a person with the face of a junglefowl as “wild looking” (using Indonesian liar, “wild, not tame”) and another as a man whose eyes dart about. Not at all pejorative, the expression refers to someone with an imposing stare, arguably not unlike a male junglefowl and, by the same token, a domestic cock. 366. Junglefowl alighting in undergrowth Kata ko’a koba A vagrant or wanderer, someone who maintains residence in two or more places A synonym is kata na ko’a, “junglefowl alights wherever (it chooses).” Nage describe junglefowl as never staying long in a single spot or roosting in the same place. Thus, if a hunter sees a junglefowl alighting in long grass or scrub, when he proceeds to the spot the bird will already have flown. This behaviour seems never to have been recorded by international ornithologists, but on this ground the Nage report cannot of course be deemed incorrect. Owing to its reputed habit, the bird serves as one of several metaphors for people who regularly move from place to place and do not maintain a permanent residence. A somewhat comparable English metaphor for an itinerant person is “bird of passage,” which, however, denotes any sort of migratory bird (Palmatier 1995, 29).

214

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 215

Figure 23 Junglefowl cock (No. 365)

367. Live like a junglefowl Muzi bhia ko’o kata Someone who leads an irregular existence In regard to both referent and motivation, the metaphor is synonymous with No. 366 and conveys the opposite sense to a porcupine metaphor (No. 172). The alliteration of kutu, “porcupine,” and kata, “junglefowl,” is discussed with reference to the porcupine.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

215

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 216

368. Quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands, Lau mala piko ne’e kata. See No. 392 369. Reproducing like junglefowl in the lowlands Lala bhia kata mala Humans and livestock that are fertile and prolific Nage employ this phrase when making offerings to beneficent spirits, requesting that humans be as prolific as, among other things, junglefowl. In this context, the expression is typically conjoined to form standard parallelisms with “swarming like flocking quail” (ligo bhia piko wio) and “sprouting like riverside reeds” (bho bhia lelu lowo). Another usage pairing the two birds is “quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands” (No. 392). Although both species belong to the Phasianidae, the occurrence of the junglefowl (kata) in the present metaphor also suggests a prosodic motivation in regard to the assonance of kata, mala (“lowlands, plain”) and lala (“spread, proliferate”). The same applies to ligo, piko, and wio in the phrase referring to flocking quails. Indeed, in regard to junglefowls, prosody might as it were compensate for the fact that these birds appear not to produce especially large clutches, comprising, according to Nage, just four to six eggs.

KESTREL • Moluccan kestrel Falco moluccensis (a small falcon) • IKI or IKI TITI 370. A single kestrel Iki sa éko Something or someone just barely visible in the distance The smallest of birds of prey, a kestrel flying or hovering at some distance can appear very small indeed. 371. Kestrel on the western hill flies in circles (and) goes directly onward Ana iki ta’a wolo mena co leo ta’a siba leta A good person

216

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 217

The metaphor occurs in the lyrics of a song performed while planting or circle-dancing. Commentators could only describe the kestrel as a reference to “good people in general,” although, as discussed elsewhere (Forth 2004a, 188), the entire phrase may allude to the impermanence of any good thing. 372. Kestrel with an injured vulva Iki puki teka A person in pain uttering a high-pitched sound The selection of the female genitalia in this context appears motivated mainly by prosody involving the bird’s name and especially the second term in the expression. As commentators remarked, iki is selected because of the similarity between the bird’s high-pitched vocalization (imitated as ki ki ki ki), which inspires its onomatopoeic name, and someone squealing from pain – for example, from a sudden injury to the foot. 373. Shame-faced kestrel unable to pick up a child Iki mea rago (or ‘ago) talo ana Someone unable to properly perform parental duties and who is therefore ashamed The phrase occurs as the main line of a song performed at certain agricultural rituals (Po Wete and Po Uta). An example of the genre pata néke (in which the two genders tease and deride one another), the lyric is sung by groups of young men and women in turn, accompanied by rapid handclapping. The reference varies according to which sex is singing. ‘Ago, or the more often heard dialectal variant rago, means to pick up an infant or a young animal that is seated or lying down. In regard to children, it can also more generally mean comforting a child or looking after its needs. When addressed by men to women, the phrase therefore mockingly suggests that the women are unable to care for children. Some commentators suggested that women similarly criticize the men as being unable to provide for a family. However, according to a more likely interpretation, the expression in this case alludes to men who are unable to engage women in sex, or who, in the English colloquial phrase, are “unable to pick up a chick.” The interpretation accords with the typically sexually suggestive character of lyrics employed in pata néke. Yet some commentators denied it – perhaps surprisingly, as

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

217

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 218

Nage are often not shy about discussing sexual matters. (Iki, it may be noted, is a men’s personal name in central Nage.) During the accompanying dance, women hold small pieces of cloth that they wave in imitation of the fluttering flight of a hovering kestrel searching for or about to swoop down on prey. Although I never heard anyone mention it, the rapid hand-clapping probably serves the same symbolic purpose. Two other features of the Moluccan kestrel may motivate the bird’s metaphorical use in this context. First, like other birds of prey, kestrels prey on young chickens. Second, according to an ethologically less certain interpretation, when people take young kestrels from the nest – as is sometimes done, to raise them or give them to children to raise – the parent birds are never able to retrieve them (or pick them up again). The commentator who advanced this explanation thus suggested that the expression refers to people who have something taken away that they are unable to recover.

KINGFISHER • Halcyon spp., Caridonax fuldiga • FEGA 374. Kingfisher with its mouth (bill) open Fega ngafa A dull-witted person or someone who, contextually, is unable to understand something Three species of kingfishers occur in Nage country, partly distinguished as “river kingfishers” (fega ae) and “dry land, upland kingfishers” (fega wolo), but all kingfisher metaphors refer simply to fega. Also expressed as “having one’s mouth open like a kingfisher” (ngafa bhia ko’o fega), Nage explain the present metaphor as a reference to the habit of kingfishers, birds with long and stout bills, of holding their bills open while perching – evidently as a means of expelling body heat. As this shows, like Westerners (and probably people in other parts of the world), Nage interpret being open-mouthed, or “slack-jawed,” as a sign of temporary mental vacancy if not generally low intelligence. 375. Mouth like a kingfisher’s bill Mumu bhia ko’o fega A person whose lips are stained red from chewing betel and areca

218

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 219

The body part is alternatively specified as wunu mumu, “lips.” Nage describe kingfishers in general as having red bills, although one common species, the Collared kingfisher Halcyon chloris, does not. Betel leaf or fruit chewed with Areca palm nut and lime turns spittle bright red. Nowadays women who wear lipstick are also described as having mouths like a kingfisher’s bill. 376. Perching like a kingfisher Ko’a fega A house floor that slopes slightly towards the back of the building The metaphor describes a disapproved disposition among Nage, who require that floors of traditional houses (built on wooden piles), if not completely level, should slope slightly towards the front – an arrangement expressed as “stubtail’s arse” (see No. 410). Nage explain the usage with reference to the idea that the tails of perching kingfishers always point downwards, thus being held decidedly lower than the head, which is typically held erect. The metaphor is further discussed in Forth (2017a).

KITE especially the Brahminy kite • Haliastur indus • JATA Kites are large hawks. Also denoting a spinning wheel, as a bird name jata itself appears to be a metaphor, assuming the designation refers to the large raptor’s revolving flight. Brahminy kites and other birds of prey (including owls) are prominent in Nage symbolism by virtue of their association with witches and malevolent spirits, and they are also among the most common predators of domestic fowls. But neither significance finds expression in conventional metaphors. 377. High-flying kite sits atop the nest Ana jata jawa zéta wawo sa The soul of a dead person The “nest” is the grave of the deceased, over which the soul is described as hovering. As regards the bird representing the soul, this was previously suggested as a provisional interpretation (Forth 2004a, 189) but can now be confirmed. Although the name of the bird incorporates that of the Brahminy

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

219

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 220

kite (jata), for Nage jata jawa denotes a distinct bird with speckled or variegated plumage, as accords with jawa meaning “strange, unusual.” The appearance of a Brahminy kite (distinguishable as jata ulu bha, “white-headed jata”) can be situationally ominous, particularly when interpreted as a manifestation of malevolent mountain spirits (nitu) in search of sacrificial victims (see chapter 2 regarding the Nage identification of humans as spirit buffalo). But it is unlikely this idea holds any significance for Nage in the present expression, partly because no one mentioned it and partly because jata jawa, a bird distinct from the Brahminy kite, refers not to a death-dealing spirit but to a deceased human soul, indeed the possible victim of such a spirit. 378. Kite sighting smoke from a fire Jata tei nu api A person who sees a chance of profit in a situation and immediately proceeds to exploit it The metaphor has its source in the tendency of Brahminy kites and other raptors to gather in large numbers when forest is burnt, in anticipation of feasting on insects driven up by the flames and smoke. The usage is thus essentially equivalent to the English “vulture” metaphor, drawn from the behaviour of vultures circling over a dying animal. Nage compared the phrase to Indonesian ada gula ada semut, “where there is sugar there are ants.” A Lio version of the Nage metaphor, with roughly the same translation and also exploiting the Brahminy kite, is mbira tei api nu. 379. Of no value at all is the big kite sitting up on the great vine, who calls uttering only harsh sounds Haba ‘é’e ana jata méze zéle koba léke tau ie ghéghe ie ghéghe A harsh-voiced noisy person whose statements are without value According to a slightly different interpretation, the expression might more specifically refer to a high-ranking person whose words carry little weight. The metaphor occurs in a song lyric contrasting the kite to the friarbird and Imperial pigeon, whose calls announce the approach of daylight. Associated with no particular part of the day, the calls of the kite serve no such purpose

220

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 221

and indeed are quite worthless. Although the same could be said of many birds, the opposition finds further support in the fact that not only are the kite’s calls of no value, but the kite itself is a pestilential poultry thief and a bird of ill-omen. Although not affecting the bird’s name, many components of this lyric evidently reflect metrical demands of the genre, notably the assonance of ‘é’e (ugly, bad), méze (big), zéle (above, up in), léke (a large vine, liana) and ghéghe (“[to utter] harsh cries”). In another song, “kite uttering harsh sounds” refers instead to a lone person who longs for the company of others and whose cries express this sorrowful condition; these others are then represented by cockatoos and chickens (see No. 304), both birds that, in contrast to mostly singular kites, tend to flock. In the present expression, ana jata méze provides an especially clear instance of ana serving to individualize or personify an animal rather than alluding to small size. Indeed, the Brahminy kite (jata) is a large bird, as underlined in the present expression by the adjective méze, “big.” 380. Brahminy kite munia Ana peti jata, peti jata A small bird, the Pale-headed munia This is the folk taxonomic name of Lonchura pallida, whose rusty red and white plumage replicates that of the large bird of prey. Owing to this resemblance, some Nage regard the little bird as one of the symbolic class of “witch birds,” of which the kite is more definitely a member. 381. Kite’s claw pepper Ko kanga jata Hawk claw pepper (Capsicum sp.) Kanga can denote the entire digit of a bird, as distinct from the claw at the tip of the toe, designated as kungu (“nail” in humans). The name refers to the shape of this small pepper, resembling the claw or talon of a bird of prey, as does the plant’s virtually identical English name.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

221

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 222

KOEL Common koel • Eudynamys scolopacea • TOE OU 382. Koel coughs and sputters but does not get a single handful Toe ou ta’a ohu ohu mona mewi sa puju dho’u A person whose efforts or contributions are not rewarded The expression follows and is paired parallelistically with a lyric referring to the Channel-billed cuckoo in a planting song (see No. 256) and has exactly the same metaphorical reference. Koels are large black cuckoos that, like the even larger Channel-billed cuckoo, are brood parasites of crows. However, the association of the koel with the Channel-billed cuckoo in this and other metaphors has nothing to do with their identical parasitic habit but solely with the significance of their calls, both heard about the same time of year, at the transition of the dry and rainy seasons, when they serve a common chronological function. 383. Koel, you call in the morning Toe ou kau ta’a polu poa Someone providing useful information Occurring in another planting song, this expression also complements a phrase referring to the Channel-billed cuckoo (No. 257). The fact that in this and other usages incorporating the two birds, the larger bird is mentioned first is explained by Nage as reflecting the Channel-billed cuckoo’s habit of calling somewhat earlier than the koel. This agrees with the fact that that poa, here glossed as “in the morning,” can also mean “on another (future) day” or “at some (indefinite) time in the near feature,” but also noteworthy is the alliteration and partial assonance effected by the combination of polu (“to call [of a bird]”) and poa (“morning”) and polu and ou (the second part of the bird’s onomatopoeic name).

MYNAH Hill mynah • Gracula religiosa • IE WEA 384. Mynah calls tilting its head to one side Ie wea polu dobhe déna A person experiencing anguish at someone’s death

222

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 223

One of several bird metaphors included in songs of mourning, according to Nage dobhe déna refers to the Hill mynah’s habit of tilting and turning its head from side to side while vocalizing (Dobhe, “slant, slope,” and déna, “flat, level,” are combined to denote this alternating movement). How this relates to human anguish is less clear, although the bird’s habit could conceivably be associated with movements of the human head indicative of bewilderment or despair at news of the death of someone close. Unlike several other birds mentioned in mourning songs, Nage do not regard the mynah’s call as a death omen. The Hill mynah, whose name is alternatively pronounced as io wea, is also mentioned in a planting song (Forth 2004a, 191) as the complement of the Bare-throated whistler (kete dhéngi, see No. 418) – a connection consistent with the occurrence of both birds high in the forest canopy in elevated locations and also with the fact that both possess a range of vocalizations and are capable mimics. The mynah, of course, is a bird that can be trained to imitate human speech.

ORIOLE Black-naped oriole • Oriolus chinensis • LEO or LEO TE’A 385. Oriole has already learned by itself, Ana leo me’a be’o. See Friarbird does not reveal the news (No. 339) 386. Oriole fish Ika leo (ika léro) A grunter Mesopristes sp. The fish is mostly yellow, like the feathers of the oriole, for Nage the epitome of birds with yellow plumage. Here leo is alternatively rendered by dialectal léro, as it is in No. 387. 387. Oriole python Goka leo Timorese python Python timorensis Nage recognize the snake as being named after alternating yellow and black markings, resembling those of the Black-naped oriole. TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

223

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 224

Figure 24 Injured Black-naped oriole (No. 387)

388. Oriole gourd Hea leo A kind of cultivated gourd So named because the skin is of a yellow colour, this is one of several named kinds of hea (“gourd, pumpkin, vegetable marrow”).

OWL Various species of Strigidae and Tytonidae • PO and JE 389. Large owl Po kua A person who pulls a garment or blanket over the head to keep warm

224

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 225

Nage classification of owls, generally named po, is discussed in Forth (2004a, 61–79). Owls are the focal member of the symbolic class of “witch birds,” a category that also includes diurnal birds of prey, crows, and drongoes. The present usage, however, draws solely on a physical resemblance, and a person huddled up and covering the head, hair, and ears with clothing or a blanket and with only face and eyes exposed can, indeed, look “like a large owl” (bhia ko’o po kua). Po kua (kua is “eagle”) denotes the largest of owls known to Nage, probably most often a Barn owl (Tyto alba or T. longimembris), which unlike species of Otus lacks “ear” tufts or “horns.” Nowadays the metaphor is often applied to people who cover their heads with hoods attached to modern jackets or wear balaclavas. 390. Hawk-owl pretends to be close, advances pretending Je podi we’e A person who feigns friendship with someone in order to take advantage Je may refer to the Brown hawk-owl Ninox scutulata. Besides the name of a bird, je means “to advance slowly.” The metaphor describes the reputed behaviour of the owl, described by Nage as alighting near roosting fowls and gradually sidling up to chickens in order to seize one, all the while imitating the piping of a chick. Applied to humans, the metaphor can refer, for example, to a man who becomes friendly with a woman to obtain sexual favours. In the ‘Ua region, in the eastern part of central Nage, what is apparently the same bird is called po wése (po, “owl”) or wése je, and the second term is used metaphorically to describe a person behaving in the same way.

PIGEON Rock dove • Columba livia • KOLO DASI 391. Pigeon down by the ocean waves at Mbai Ana kolo dasi lau bata Bai The soul of someone recently deceased The expression occurs in a mourning song, where it precedes and complements “sea fowl cries pitying itself ” (No. 280). Nage mostly understand the lyric as referring to a dead soul, in which respect it recalls Christian representations of the Holy Ghost and the human soul as assuming the form of a

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

225

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 226

dove (see, e.g., Luke 3:22; Mathew 3:16). Among Nage, however, many birds besides pigeons and doves are considered manifestations of souls or are otherwise associated with souls. The same species that abounds in Western cities, the Rock dove, or “domestic pigeon,” is introduced in eastern Indonesia, but how long it has been present is unclear. Nage suggested that dasi is inserted after kolo to correspond with Bai, a location on Flores’s north coast. But, arguably, this makes sense only by virtue of the resemblance of dasi and tasi, a contextual reference to the sea, which is consistent with the location of the bird “by the ocean waves at Mbai.”

QUAIL Various species • PIKO or BEWU Nearly all metaphors referring to quails name the bird piko, a term specifically denoting the Brown quail Coturnix ypsilophora but also naming a more general category (or “folk-intermediate,” sensu Berlin 1992) that further includes the separately named Blue-breasted quail Coturnix chinensis (Nage mulu ki) and Buttonquails Turnix spp. (Nage bewu). As only one metaphor employs bewu (“buttonquail”), I have listed this with the others below. Nage describe quails (piko) as very short-tailed or even tailless birds and as birds that can never alight in trees. The origin of these traits is the topic of two traditional Nage narratives, yet neither motivates any Nage quail metaphor. 392. Quail and junglefowl down in the lowlands Lau mala piko ne’e kata People seek(ing) the company of others like themselves This metaphor is discussed earlier, with reference to the complementary expression “Ground-dove and (Spotted) dove up in the hills” (No. 357). 393. Quail that invites others along, dove that urges on friends Piko ta’a wito io, kolo ta’a ‘isi moko A person who seeks companionship or support of others of the same kind Forming part of a proverb, the metaphor is motivated by the flocking habits of quails and doves. However, it is also noteworthy that piko kolo (“quails

226

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 227

[and] doves”) is a standard composite denoting valued game birds that also do harm to crops; similarly “quails [and] rats” (piko dhéke) is a collective reference to various avian and mammalian crop pests. At the same time, prosody is evident in the assonance of piko, wito, and io and, in the complementary expression, kolo and moko (“friend, companion”). 394. Quails set down, piko bebe. See Doves fly away (No. 402) 395. Short quail Piko pada A person who is short and squat Quails are of course small, round, plump birds. Nage apply the phrase only to adults, not to children (unlike “small porcupine,” No. 174). Pada, “short, squat,” does not occur in the folk taxonomic name of any sort of quail or other bird, and in this expression serves only to emphasize the attribute of quails that renders them an appropriate metaphor for people of a certain body type. 396. Swarming like flocking quail, Ligo bhia piko wio. See Reproducing like junglefowl (No. 369) Ligo is sometimes replaced by synonymous ligho. The only meaning for wio commentators could identify was “Sumba (Island), Sumbanese.” As this makes no sense in the present context, the term may be inserted simply for metrical reasons. On the other hand, in ‘Ua, towards the eastern boundary of central Nage, wio occurs as the name of a passerine bird, possibly the Golden whistler Pachycephala pectoralis. 397. Highland quail Piko du’a A nocturnal sound Although piko du’a straightforwardly translates as “highland quail,” Nage do not definitely conceive of this entity, known only by its nocturnal call, as either a kind of quail or a bird of any sort. The call gives warning that a thief is about, looking to steal livestock, so that upon hearing it people should take ritual and practical preventative measures (Forth 2004a, 102).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

227

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 228

398. Buttonquail bean Hobho bewu A kind of string bean The cultivar is thus named, according to Nage, because markings on the small, multicoloured beans resemble those on the eggs of Buttonquails (Turnix spp.). 399. Quail bone(s) Toko piko A kind of grass; a vine The name refers to two plants: a kind of grass with edible leaves consumed cooked or raw and a thorny vine. The motivation is the thinness of the stems.

SCRUBFOWL Orange-footed scrubfowl • Megapodius reinwart • KOKO WODO 400. Scrubfowl that lays eggs but always leaves them behind Koko wodo telo ea telo ea A woman who bears children she does not raise, leaving them to the care of others A megapode, the Orange-footed scrubfowl lays its unusually large eggs underneath a large mound of earth and plant litter, the heat from which incubates them. Unlike other birds, therefore, the female scrubfowl does not sit on a clutch and, since several hens will lay eggs under the same mound, there are in fact no single nests. The behaviour is at least partially known to Nage, who describe the scrubfowl as “laying eggs on the ground but hatching them in (or from) a tree,” and as “knowing how to lay eggs but not knowing how to brood them” (telo be’o neke kéwo). Accordingly, Nage remark that whenever one comes across the bird, usually after hearing its calls, it is always sitting in a tree. Other ideas apparently relevant to the metaphor include the claim that a hen scrubfowl with eggs will gradually descend from its tree and that when it reaches the ground this means that the young have already hatched and are about to leave the nest mound. By then, the chicks are already quite large;

228

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 229

they are also relatively independent and do not follow the parent birds when searching for food. Instead, they look for food by themselves, and, Nage further assert, the mother birds will peck at young to ensure that they do so. The image of the scrubfowl as a poor parent is also found on Sumba, where “to have (raise) children like a scrubfowl (kaluki)” (paana kalukingu) describes people who do not look after their offspring by reference to the same nesting and egg-laying behaviour observed by the Nage (Forth 2000, 189). At present scrubfowl are rare in central Nage and apparently have always been more common in coastal regions. According to an evidently more fantastic idea, when scrubfowl eggs hatch those hatchlings that head in the direction of the sea become sea creatures. But this seems only to apply to scrubfowl found near the south coast. In coastal regions throughout Flores, a variant of this idea applies to sea turtles, whose hatchlings that turn towards dry land are said to become monitors, snakes, rats, and other non-marine creatures. Apparently relevant to this widespread belief is the fact that, like scrubfowl, sea turtles, after laying eggs in holes dug in sandy beaches, similarly leave the eggs to hatch on their own. In Lio, the scrubfowl is called manu wodo, thus incorporating manu, otherwise meaning “chicken” as in Nage. Wodo also occurs in three Nage metaphors incorporating the domestic fowl (Nos. 271, 278, 302). However, as the name of the scrubfowl, the term may have a different derivation (cf. e.g., Sumbanese wundu, “scrubfowl”), and in any case neither Lio nor Nage regard the bird as a kind of “chicken.” In the Nage name, koko is considered onomatopoeic. Although it cannot unambiguously be called a “totem,” the scrubfowl has a special association with a section of the Nage clan Mude (Forth 2004, 199a), a clan partly resident in ‘Ua (where I first recorded the present metaphor) and otherwise settled in villages not far from ‘Ua.

SPOTTED DOVE • Streptopelia chinensis and BARRED DOVE • Geopelia maugei • KOLO 401. Dove looking at a pool of water Kolo moni ae Someone who is present at some undertaking but does not actively participate or does not do so immediately

229

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 230

Figure 25 Young Barred doves (No. 401)

The phrase describes a thirsty dove that will not descend to drink at a pool of water but remains perched for a time until it feels that it is safe to do so. The expression refers, for example, to people who attend a discussion but do not speak or remain silent for a while before participating. Nage kolo denotes not only the Spotted dove (distinguishable as kolo méze, “big kolo”) but also the Barred dove Geopelia maugei (kolo dhoro or kolo ghodho). Related terms in other eastern Indonesian languages refer to birds more generally (Forth 2006), a sense also suggested by the Nage composite peti kolo, which is similarly used for birds in general. In fact, this broader sense is implicit in the

230

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 231

present metaphor, since not just doves but birds of many kinds will hesitate before flying to the ground to drink or feed. 402. Doves fly away, quails set down Kolo co, piko bebe One person or family abandons a field, after which another begins cultivating there An alternative to the second phrase is piko begu, “quails alight (on the ground).” The metaphor reflects a comparison of one kind of bird setting down in a place previously occupied by a bird of another kind with different groups of people who successively cultivate a plot. Apart from the association of doves and quails enshrined in the standard composite piko kolo, the association of the two birds in the present metaphor is evidently motivated by their largely common habitats and the fact that both feed on grain, as do human cultivators who successively occupy the same plot. Bebe, also meaning “to fall to the ground (e.g., of a person knocked down),” refers to birds alighting on the ground – in contrast to ko’a, which means “alighting in a tree, on a branch.”2 403. Ground-dove and (Spotted) dove up in the hills, Zéle wolo muke ne’e kolo. See No. 357 404. (Spotted) dove coos from up on the volcano, sees Job’s tears of people on the hillsides of Geo Kolo ku zéle mai lobo, tei ke’o ko’o ata lebi Geo A woman trying vainly to attract a man Exemplifying the genre called pata néke, teasing allusions directed to members of the opposite sex, the phrases are heard in planting songs. Nage identify the dove as a metaphorical reference to a woman, and Job’s tears as a man or men she is trying to attract. Geo (a region to the northeast of central Nage) appears to be motivated only by its rhyming with ke’o. Pronounced similarly to English “coo,” Nage ku refers specifically to the calls of doves named kolo but has the further sense of “to express self-pity.” This second sense may be present in énga ku, a phrase referring to a public announcement (énga is “to call summon”) typically made from an elevated location – thus sometimes

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

231

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 232

glossed as “calling from the mountain” – and declaring one’s troubles or making a complaint. The possible relevance of this practice to the present expression is indicated by the dove “cooing” (or calling) “from up on the volcano.” However, ku in énga ku is also interpreted as referring to the group of people, the masses as it were, to whom the announcement is addressed. 405. Dove that urges on friends, Kolo ta’a ‘isi moko. See Quail that invites others along (No. 393) 406. Weeping like a dove cooing Nangi bhia kolo ku To cry over, bemoan a (material) loss; to engage in self pity The phrase specifically describes someone bemoaning a loss of goods, or livestock that have died or been stolen, or being short of food owing to crop failure, and not, for example, the loss of a relative who has died. 407. Dove coconut Nio kolo A kind of coconut palm Contrasting with “buffalo coconut” (No. 25; see Figure 2) and other varieties, the palm is so named, according to Nage, because the nut is smaller than other coconuts, just as these small doves are smaller than other Columbiformes and other creatures generally. 408. Dove droppings Ta’i kolo A kind of cosh used in pugilistic competitions (etu) Made of buffalo hide wrapped in black palm fibre and light-coloured twine, the elliptical implements, in central Nage more often named named kepo (a term also meaning “[to make a] fist”) are held in the hand and used to strike opponents (see figure 26). Nage disagreed about the possible motivation: some thought it might reflect a similarity of colour between the cosh and bird droppings, others mentioned a similarity of shape. In either case, kolo in this context may have the more general sense of “bird.”

232

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 233

Figure 26 “Dove droppings” (No. 408)

STUBTAIL Russet-capped stubtail (or tesia) • Tesia everetti • BAMA or BAMA CEA 409. Stubtail does not want to address (someone), Ana bama bhia mega. See Fantail is present at noontide (No. 333) 410. Stubtail’s arse Bui bama A house floor that slopes slightly towards the front of the building

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

233

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 234

This is the preferred disposition among Nage and the opposite of the arrangement called “perching like a kingfisher” (No. 376). That the little bird serves as the model reflects the Nage claim that, apart from being “tailless” (the bird in fact has a very short tail), the stubtail commonly perches and flies with its head – in the metaphor corresponding to the front of a house – held slightly lower than its rear (Forth 2017a).

SUNBIRD • Nectarinia spp. • TIWE or TIWE TE’A 411. One-eyed sunbird Tiwe mata gibe A young woman ambivalent about a man’s advances Sunbirds are the smallest birds known to Nage. Tiwe includes the Olivebacked sunbird N. jugularis and the Flame-breasted sunbird N. solaris. Besides “one-eyed” – in the sense of having one eye damaged or missing – gibe also refers to having an eye closed, for example from dried eye rheum, and more generally to impaired vision. The metaphor occurs in a song performed by males teasing (néke) females that describes the “sunbird” (the woman) as sitting in a tree (a dwelling that the man wishes to enter) but being overcome by smoke (understood as false flattery) and therefore alternatively opening and closing her eyes, interpreted in this context as an expression of ambivalence. Although most Nage I questioned rejected it, I am still not certain that a previous interpretation of “one-eyed sunbird” as a more specific reference to the female genitalia (Forth 2004a, 194) – described as alternately responsive and unresponsive to a man endeavouring to “gain entry” – is entirely mistaken. 412. Sunbirds throng, friarbirds squabble Tiwe mole, koka sowa People enjoying an abundance of palm juice Like friarbirds, sunbirds are nectar feeders. The phrase is one of several that complement “deer bathe” (No. 163) in rites associated with the tapping of Arenga palms and expresses the desire that palms produce an abundance of palm juice – so much that both sorts of birds will be attracted in large num-

234

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 235

bers. Sunbirds are then envisioned as swarming over the juice and friarbirds, as is their wont, as squabbling noisily over the bonanza. The sunbird and the friarbird are further associated in an origin myth, where the small but plucky sunbird rescues the friarbird after the larger bird is captured by his opponent, the Imperial pigeon (Forth 2004a, 127; Forth 2007b, 505–6). The sunbird’s association with the Arenga palm also informs a Nage story (Forth 2004a, 150) recounting how people first discovered sweettasting toddy and began tapping palms after a large bamboo, swaying in the wind, accidently rubbed against an Arenga palm stalk growing close by. Soon afterwards a sunbird dropped blossoms from the ko’u tree (possibly Melochia umbellata), a fermenting agent, into a container full of the juice.

SWALLOWS and SWIFTS • Hirundidae and Apodidae • EBU TITU 413. Swallows and swifts command the months (seasons); Swallows and swifts wander the sky Ebu titu watu wula; Ebu titu leo lizu The wet season is approaching, the rains are near The two expressions are metaphorically synonymous. Ebu titu equally designates swallows and swifts, birds that, although belonging to different ornithological families, are similar in form and behaviour, a product of convergent evolution. Lyrics in songs, including planting songs, the present phrase refers to the birds’ significance as signs of rain, owing to the regular appearance of flights of swifts and swallows towards the end of the dry season. For the same reason, the birds are alternatively named awe uza, “rain summoner,” or ana uza, “rain creature,” and songs mentioning the birds additionally refer to the sounds of distant thunder, expressed metaphorically as “a young horse beating the drum” (No. 59) and “Mother Red striking the gong.” (“Mother Red” is a synonym of “Mother Géna,” a female personification of rain.) “Commands the months” implies that, by signalling the approach or beginning of the rainy season – the northwest monsoon lasting from October or November to April or May in Nage country – the birds determine the course of the year and the division of wet and dry months.

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

235

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 236

UNIDENTIFIED BIRDS 414. A large hawk Wole wa A person holding the arms perpendicular to the body (especially when dancing) Translating as “plays with (the) wind,” as a bird name wole wa may be synonymous with jata jawa (see No. 377). “To dance like (a) wole wa” describes a method of dancing with the arms outstretched like a hovering raptor. 415. A small bird Witu tui Someone who is excessively nervous or unbalanced; boisterous and unruly young children Referring in part to people who act “crazy” (bingu or bingu titu), the metaphor reflects the Nage idea that birds onomatopoically named witu tui – possibly the great tit Parus major or a brush cuckoo – pick up human head hair, either clippings or strands of combed hair, to take to their nests or otherwise to the tops of tall trees, and that this causes the hair’s owner to become mentally deranged (Forth 2004a,102–3). Children behaving “wildly” are likely to be described as “like ana witu tui,” where ana can be understood either as a specific reference to children or to the bird’s small size. As a reference to derangement, the metaphor may recall English “cuckoo” in the sense of “foolish, demented, or insane” (Palmatier 1995, 105), and it is therefore worth noting that, according to some evidence, witu tui may partly denote a cuckoo of the genus Cacomantis (Forth 2004a, 129; also Coates and Bishop 1997, 348–9, who list both C. variolosus and C. sepuclaris as species present on Flores). As Cacomantis species, like other cuckoos, are brood parasites that do not build nests, however, Nage claims about the nest-building habits of witu tui obviously do not match this possible ornithological identification.

236

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 237

WATERHEN White-breasted waterhen • Amaurornis phoenicurus • KUKU RAKU The waterhen is a rail, a water bird with long spindly legs and large feet that produces a series of noisy vocalizations (see figure 27). Metaphorically, Nage employ the bird’s name, kuku raku, in two quite different ways, and I therefore treat these as two separate metaphors. Perhaps owing to its onomatopoeic quality, the name is regularly pronounced with the /r/, despite the general absence of this sound in the central Nage dialect. 416. White-breasted waterhen (1) Kuku raku A thin person with long legs; someone who is garrulous or complains loudly about things Although the bird also has very large feet, in addition to its cries it is the bird’s legs that have metaphorical value for Nage, who characterize people with large or wide feet as having “feet like a fan (or bellows).” An apt metaphor for a garrulous person, the bird’s loud and discordant vocalizations have been described as “a jumble of bubbling, chuckling, squabbling nasal screams and squeals; often uttered by more than one bird at the same time” (Coates and Bishop 1997, 280). As a reference to a thin, long-legged person, the metaphor is generally synonymous with usages employing herons and egrets (Nos. 358, 359). 417. White-breasted waterhen (2) Kuku raku People swarming, crowding around (a desired, object) Relating to human physical and vocal peculiarities, the first metaphorical use of kuku raku (No. 416) straightforwardly reflects distinctive physical features of the bird. While also alluding to the bird’s cries, this second usage is quite different. Several commentators independently analyzed it as follows: people swarming around something are described as waterhens because one of the bird’s distinctive cries sounds like gheo gheo gheo, and gheo is also a word meaning “to encircle” and “to swarm, throng, crowd around, overwhelm.”

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

237

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 238

Figure 27 Waterhen (No. 416)

(The full cry is replicated as gheo gheo gheo kuku raku kuku kuku raku.) As a verbal construct “(to act like) a waterhen” thus describes a number of people busily crowding around a person or place where consumables (food, tobacco) are on offer. This can be done with or without invitation. In the former instance, a person might say, for example, mai kita kuku raku (or bhia kuku raku), “let’s be like waterhens,” thereby encouraging others to share food from

238

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 239

a single plate or take cigarettes from a single packet. (In the second sense I have used the expression myself, when offering cigarettes to Nage associates.) On the other hand, when people take things uninvited or in a grasping manner, they may be admonished for “being like waterhens.” When I first encountered this interpretation, I was naturally sceptical, as it seemed fanciful and idiosyncratic. It is also one of the few metaphors in which an animal’s name can be understood as a verb (as in English “to rat on someone” or “to snake along,” said of a river or road). In fact, the interpretation appears to be widely known among Nage, and the metaphor is regularly employed in this way. However, some commentators suggested the usage – drawing on the homonymy of gheo – was a relatively recent innovation. One man in his late fifties who had spent several years in Java in the 1980s spontaneously stated that, before his departure, he had never heard “waterhen” (kuku raku) used in this way, whereas after his return he began hearing it often. Insofar as the metaphor refers to people taking things in an enthusiastic if not patently voracious or intemperate way, I once suggested that the usage might have been inspired by the similarity between the bird’s onomatopoeic name, kuku raku, and Indonesian kuku rakus, roughly “greedy, grasping fingernails, claws.” But although arguably bolstered by the Nage practice of deleting final consonants (like the /s/ in Indonesian rakus) when incorporating foreign elements into their own language, this hypothesis was not well received. As noted earlier, under the alternative name lako lizu (“sky dog,” No. 110), the cries of the waterhen function as a chronological sign, indicating the beginning of the rainy season (Forth 2004a, 12). However, this significance has no bearing on either of the metaphorical uses of kuku raku.

WHISTLER Bare-throated whistler • Pachycepala nudigula • KETE DHÉNGI 418. Little whistler half-way up the mountain Ana kete dhéngi zéle [or ena] kisa kéli A mistreated child The Bare-throated whistler is a songbird of high altitudes with a melodious and varied vocal repertoire. Occurring in song, this expression and variants

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

239

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 240

draw on a story describing the origin of the whistler, a bird that Nage say is heard but never seen. In the narrative, the bird derives from a little girl who is mistreated by her mother on a cold rainy night and who, to escape her cruel parent, turns into a whistler and flies to the higher slopes of the volcano Ebu Lobo. At least two empirical features of the species inform these ideas. First, the bird is an extraordinary songster and a superb mimic, and its song is indeed heard far more often than the bird itself is seen. Second, the bird inhabits high mountainous regions where, by Nage standards, the air is cold and damp. Consistent with its identification with a mistreated child, the whistler is further associated with aborted foetuses and the souls of deceased infants, which Nage say transform into these birds (Forth 2004a, 87–9, 151). The theme of children or adults being transformed into animals as a result of physical mistreatment is common in Indonesian origin myths, and the story of the whistler has been analyzed in this comparative context in Forth (2007c). Comparative Remarks on the Metaphorical Value of Different Birds and Bird Names As noted earlier, Nage employ forty-nine, or 68 percent, of their bird categories as metaphors. The product is 178 metaphorical expressions, a total second only to mammals. This relative prominence of birds reflects the relative complexity of Nage bird classification and the extent of their knowledge of birds. Most Nage can thus describe and identify dozens of birds by name, with some distinguishing over sixty – a figure that would seem impressive by the standards of anglophone folk ornithology. On the other hand, a comprehensive dictionary of English animal metaphors (Palmatier 1995) records expressions incorporating forty-two bird names, all of which, with the exception of “bird,” correspond to folk-generic categories in anglophone folk taxonomy (e.g., buzzard, chicken, eagle, lark),3 and this number falls not far short of the Nage total. However, some birds in the English list are exotics (e.g., albatross, dodo, parrot, peacock) whereas all Nage birds are local kinds. In addition, several birds Palmatier lists – although not necessarily the metaphors in which they occur – are probably unknown to many Englishspeakers (e.g., booby, catbird, and rook). So there can be little question that, by comparison to most anglophones, Nage possess a greater knowledge of

240

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 241

the birds they employ metaphorically, a circumstance consistent with their apparently greater ability to provide substantial interpretations. Of the twenty-three bird categories that do not occur in any Nage metaphors, two are folk-specifics (kolo dhoro, o ae bha) whose referents are implicitly subsumed by the corresponding folk-generics (see kolo, Nos. 401– 8, and o ae, No. 359) while another ten comprise birds that are unfamiliar to most Nage. But lack of familiarity may not be the only factor, and other reasons for their non-occurrence may lie in the character of the names themselves. Of the forty-nine metaphorical kinds, twenty-three are named monomially (i.e., with single lexemes or “words,” e.g., koka, “friarbird”) while another six designated with binomial names are employed metaphorically only with the short form of the name.4 For example, none of the seven cockatoo metaphors employ the bird’s complete name (kaka kea) but instead either kea or kaka or dialectal forms of these (kéka, kéra). Similarly, the bushchat, completely known as tute péla, occurs in metaphors only under the short form of the name, tute – as do the stubtail (bama or bama cea), oriole (leo or leo te’a), sunbird (tiwe or tiwe te’a), and eagle (kua or kua méze). Other names cannot be shortened without a loss of meaning (e.g., kaka daza, “dollarbird,” cannot be abbreviated as kaka since this always refers to the cockatoo). Including monomial forms of binomials, monomial names account for nearly 60 percent of metaphorical categories, whereas of the twenty-three birds that do not occur in metaphor, just nine (or 39 percent) are designated monomially. In addition, the fourteen binomially named categories include six of the ten unfamiliar birds. Of course, some binomially named birds do occur in metaphors. For example, the Channel-billed cuckoo (muta me) appears in as many as five. Yet such relatively long and complex names, many of which themselves have analyzable meanings (referring to appearance, behaviour, and so on), are evidently less favoured in conventional metaphor, and this likely reflects some combination of syntactical, prosodic, and semantic factors. All named with monomials and all comprising relatively common and distinctive species, the absence of five other kinds from Nage bird metaphors is less easily explained. These include the Sunda pygmy woodpecker (detu, also detu dalu), Great-billed parrot (feni), Savannah nightjar (leba), cuckoo-dove (‘owa), and a rail (wi).

TA L K I N G W I T H B I R D S

241

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 242

The Chestnut-backed thrush, papa or ana papa, is also not used metaphorically; however, most central Nage became familiar with the species only in the 1990s, when trappers began catching the birds for commercial sale, and before this time papa (a word also meaning “side” and denoting a reciprocal relationship or action) was mostly unknown as the name of a bird.

242

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 243

6 Other Non-Mammals in Metaphor: Snakes, Lizards, Fish, Frogs, and More Reviewing seventy-three expressions, the present chapter describes all remaining Nage metaphors incorporating vertebrates, thus reptiles, frogs (the only amphibians present on Flores Island), and fish. These include twentythree animal categories, all except three of which are folk-generics. One exception is tu gea, “bullfrog,” a folk-specific included in the generic category “frog” (pake). The other two are the life form categories “snake” (nipa) and “fish” (ika). (As discussed in Forth 2016, three categories of gobies – ana bo, kaka watu, and tebhu teke – as well as fish fry [ipu], all of which Nage employ metaphorically, function in their folk taxonomy as folk-generics.) The categories are dealt with in the same order followed in Forth (2016). Of the seventy-three metaphors, the largest number, twenty-two (30 percent), employ snakes, but lizards come a close second, with nineteen metaphors. Moreover, if the five crocodile metaphors were included with the three named sorts of lizards – a recourse not without herpetological merit – then these would outnumber the snakes. “Snake” (nipa) and “fish” (ika) are the only Nage life forms named with single lexemes (or monomials), a circumstance that facilitates the use of both terms as metaphors. At the same time, the monomial character of the folk-taxonomic names is consistent with the fact that both snakes and fish are physically and behaviourally so similar among themselves, especially in comparison to mammals and birds, and moreover so distinct from other animals. Besides “snake,” Nage metaphors incorporate six more specific snake categories (folk-generics), thus making a total of seven. Palmatier’s (1995) English listings are generally comparable: he records six snake categories (including

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 244

English “snake”), although two of these – “rattlesnake” and “viper” – are according to Palmatier’s interpretations metaphorically synonymous with “snake.” And while Nage employ three lizard categories as metaphors, or four including the crocodile, Palmatier records two (“lizard” and “chameleon”) in addition to “alligator” and “crocodile.” Usages incorporating fish and amphibians in the two languages are less comparable owing to more pronounced zoogeographical differences between eastern Indonesia and English-speaking countries, at least those in the northern hemisphere.

SNAKES 419. Hair that looks like it has been licked by a snake Fu bhia nipa semo Long, straight, and glossy female head hair Considered a mark of beauty, the expression refers especially to the hair of a young woman. Here translated as “to lick,” semo specifically describes the habit of snakes salivating on prey to make it easier to swallow. 420. Snake coiled in a hole Nipa woe lia An inactive, passive, or lazy person As Nage commentators pointed out, snakes coil up in holes in order to sleep and usually uncoil and become active only when they need to go in search of prey. There seems to be little difference between the referent of this metaphor and “snake in an orchard” (No. 422), although serpents inhabiting shady orchards are often encountered coiled and sleeping on vegetation rather than in holes. 421. Snake in a hole, white (or pale) bronzeback Nipa lia, gala bha A person of lower status (including a child) who does not defer to superiors Gala is the snake Dendrelaphis pictus inornatus, the Painted bronzeback. The interpretation of the expression is contested. Mostly employed as a depreca-

244

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 245

tion, the metaphor is by no means always applied to someone who is actually of lower status – as, for example, is a child or adolescent. In a more specific usage, a person can curse another by declaring “you should die like a snake in a hole, a pale bronzeback,” meaning, in part, away from home and without the company of family. As a snake in a hole (in the ground or a rock crevice) is normally more lowly positioned than a snake on the ground or in a tree, however, the image provides a suitable metaphor for a person of low status. So too may “pale bronzeback” insofar as it is the underside of a gala snake that is lighter-coloured, as is the underside of other snakes; hence the focus of this particular phrase may alternatively fall on the belly of the snake contrasting to its darker ventral surface rather than on the relative position of holes typically occupied by snakes. In several respects, the Nage usage recalls the English metaphor “lower than a snake’s belly,” referring to a person who is judged “totally contemptible” or “totally humiliated” (Palmatier 1995, 246). Nage often construe the expression as synonymous with “a red monkey, white gala snake” (No. 235), another phrase usually uttered in anger and directed towards children. Especially with regard to “snake in a hole,” alternative interpretations included a person who lives alone outside of a village (e.g., in a field hut, cf. No. 487) and someone who is bold and aggressive only within his or her home village and never outside. Both behaviours are disapproved by Nage, so in this respect the expression conveys a similar insult. Although most Nage understand “snake in a hole” (nipa lia) as the correct version of the expression, two regular informants insisted this was nipa ‘ia, “snake under an upright stone.” Nevertheless, neither could explain the sense of this phrase. ‘Ia denotes ritually significant stones erected inside villages, but I have never heard of any particular association of such stones with snakes. 422. Snake in an orchard Nipa napu A quiet, inactive, or lethargic person or someone who rarely leaves home The usage seems not to be well known in central Nage. Denoting specific locations planted with fruit-bearing and other useful trees, napu (“orchard,” “grove,” “plantation”) are shady places full of insects and other food for snakes, where, requiring little effort to obtain food, the creatures can remain

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

245

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 246

for long periods, coiled and largely motionless. Rather like English “lounge lizard,” to which it arguably bears some semantic resemblance, nipa napu (“orchard snake”) is not a folk-taxonomic name for any particular kind of snake and occurs only as a metaphor. 423. Snake obstructing a path Nipa baga zala A person who gets in the way Sometimes simply expressed as “like a snake” (bhia ko’o nipa), the phrase can refer, for example, to children who fall asleep or nap on the front gallery of a house, thus obstructing adults engaged in some activity there and needing to step over them. But it can apply to anyone who physically gets in the way of others. In ritual address to spirits, Nage use fata baga zala, “dead wood lying across a path,” to refer to problems or difficulties that hinder people in life’s general course or in the context of particular activities people wish to see to a successful conclusion, but “snake obstructing a path” seems not to be employed in this more abstract way. 424. Snake shedding its skin Nipa lo huwa A person whose clothes fall off or become loose The metaphorical referent of “skin” (huwa) in this expression is usually a waistcloth or sarong, a tubular garment that serves as the basic article of clothing for both men and women and can occasionally come loose or fall down when a person gets up from sitting or reclining. The phrase is uttered mostly in friendly banter among men, though women told me they also use it with reference to both males and females, and to both adults and children. 425. Snake that invades a rat’s hole (nest) Nipa ta’a ‘e lia dhéke A more powerful person who usurps someone less powerful The metaphor turns on the fact that both rats or mice (dhéke) and snakes characteristically occupy and nest in holes. Hence, by analogy, the phrase describes someone who successfully takes over a position or land or other

246

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 247

property that rightfully belongs to a person who is metaphorically smaller and weaker. 426. Two-headed snake Nipa ulu pali A duplicitous person whose intentions are unclear and cannot be trusted The term is also the folk-taxonomic name of the Island pipe snake Cylindrophis opisthorhodus, a species whose tail resembles its head and that raises its tail when retreating from a threat, thereby giving the impression of a snake moving backwards. Nage commonly describe the snake as not only possessing two heads but also as being capable of moving – or going “forward” – in two opposite directions so that the creature’s actual direction of travel is ambiguous. Accordingly, a person described as a “two-headed snake” is someone who may say one thing to one person and something completely different to another, especially in order to advance his or her own interests, gain an opportunity, or stir up trouble. The usage will likely recall the English metaphor “speaking with a forked tongue,” which of course alludes to snakes in general. As shown below, however, the English expression is more exactly replicated in Nage metaphors employing the monitor lizard (Nos. 446 and 443). As not all Nage regard the pipe snake as actually possessing two heads, the metaphor is grounded in an idea that some Nage would dispute. Nevertheless, the representation is rehearsed sufficiently often to maintain the metaphor, which of course derives further support from the animal’s name. (In Malay, another species of Cylindrophis is identically named ular kepala dua, “two-headed snake.”) 427. Ascending snakes Nipa nai A kind of shrub or flowering plant The plant is apparently so named because its stem and leaves are described as slippery, like a snake. Reflecting this property, the leaves are boiled to produce a decoction given to women in labour to ensure a quick and easy delivery. However, “ascending snakes” also describes the consequence of burning driftwood inside a house, a prohibited practice claimed to result in snakes, cockroaches, and perhaps other insects entering a dwelling. For the

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

247

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 248

same reason, Nage are averse to burning this plant as well, although “ascending snakes wood” (kaju nipa nai) seems more often to refer to the wood of trees washed up in a flood. For different dialects of Ngadha and Endenese, Verheijen (1990, 34, 54) lists “ascending snakes” as the name of plants in the genera Pouzolzia, Euodia, or Leea. 428. Snake tuber Uwi nipa A kind of wild tuber The tuber is named with reference to its long, thin shape, having the same thickness from top to bottom, or, as this was once expressed, having a long root and a small “head,” and thus resembling a snake. Informants disagreed about whether it was edible. 429. Growing (ascending) snake Nipa tebu The rainbow Nage have no other term for “rainbow.” As tebu refers to growth, especially in plants, it may seem curious that the Nage imagery involves a snake descending to drink at a water source (thus head first), an idea also suggested by a Lio and Endenese term for rainbows, nipa moa, “thirsty snake.” On the other hand, no one claims ever to have seen this, and all Nage I questioned described “growing snake” merely as a “way of speaking” (bholo ‘ana). An association of rainbows and snakes is general in Indonesia and also occurs in other parts of the world, for example, in the Australian Aboriginal figure of the “rainbow serpent.” In Nage and elsewhere, representing the meteorological phenomenon as a serpent is presumably facilitated by a rainbow’s long and thin shape and multicoloured stripes. Paralleling a widespread Indonesian idea specifying rainbows as precursors of illness or affliction in humans or livestock (Bader 1971; Barnes 1973), Nage claim that a rainbow can suck the blood of people of high rank (Forth 1998, 95), and they warn children against pointing at rainbows lest their fingers become bent. Nipa tebu (“growing snake”) also appears in the longer phrase nipa tebu uza leza, (where uza leza means “sunshine rain”), referring to the fact that rainbows are commonly seen when the sun shines through falling rain or drizzle.

248

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 249

430. Character of a Russell’s viper Waka ba A bold, aggressive person who inspires fear in others Ba is the name of Russell’s viper Daboia russelii limitis, a highly venomous snake that Nage speak of with fear and loathing. As they remark, encountering the viper immediately causes the body hair to stand on end, even in people subsequently able to muster the courage to kill the snake. People’s reaction to someone with “the character of a viper,” typically a man, is similarly visceral. Usually translated with Indonesian wibawa, “power, authority; bearing” and pengaruh, “influence (on others),” waka has two apparently related senses. First, it refers to the human forehead, or more specifically the middle of the forehead just below the hairline. Second, and as in the present expression, the term denotes a personal inner strength, a sort of force of character or masterfulness manifest in interpersonal dealings, which some people possess and others do not – or do so in a lower degree (see the similar sounding waka bha, “white, light-coloured waka,” the quality of a quiet, easily intimidated person who is unable, for example, to respond when spoken to in a harsh manner). As waka denotes a quality normally attributed only to humans, its application to a snake is itself metaphorical, and the metaphor draws primarily on a similarity between the typical human reaction to the snake and an unmediated experience of certain aggressive, powerful individuals. 431. False viper Lola ba The mock viper This is the folk taxonomic name of the Common mock viper Psammodynastes pulverulentus, not an actual viper but a harmless snake Nage recognize as resembling the deadly Russell’s viper (ba). Apart from similar colouring, the snake adopts a viper-like pose when threatened. The precise meaning of lola is uncertain, but the gloss “false” fits Nage explanations of the name, which obviously has the same motivation as English “mock viper.”

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

249

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 250

432. Viper gourd Hea ba A variety of gourd or pumpkin The gourd is so named because the skin has markings like the Russell’s viper. 433. Viper tree, viper wood Kaju ba A kind of tree Used for timber, in context the tree is also called simply ba (see ba dheo, a reference to buildings made of ba and dheo wood). The species is so named because the bark of the tree and the grain of the wood resemble patterning on the skin of the Russell’s viper (see Figure 28). Given the Nage abhorrence of this snake, it is somewhat remarkable that the wood is used in house construction, especially in view of the taboo on driftwood (see No. 427). 434. Bronzeback Gala A person or animal that moves swiftly or does something quickly A long, thin, non-venomous and fairly common snake, Painted bronzebacks are the fastest snakes known to Nage, and suddenly coming across one moving rapidly in the forest or across a path can be very startling. Nage say the snake can move with such speed and force that it can puncture dry vegetation such as bamboo sheaths, and for this reason, and because of the shock it can cause, travellers refer to the snake, euphemistically, as the “spirits’ blowgun” (supi nitu, Forth 2016, 202). The only other snakes to which Nage apply euphemisms are poisonous kinds. Qualities metaphorically represented by the gala snake can be positive or negative. Apart from the several more specific usages listed below, I recorded “like a bronzeback” (bhia gala), describing a person who acts with speed or quickly completes a task; “having a bronzeback’s body” (weki gala), describing human agility as well as speed; and “horse like a bronzeback” (ja sama gala) referring to a swift horse (ja). As regards the last expression, a magical use of the desiccated tail of a bronzeback in horse-racing magic is noteworthy (Forth 2016, 202).

250

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 251

Figure 28 Viper tree (No. 433)

435. Bronzeback’s tongue Lema gala A person who talks too much; a skilled speaker; a persuasive person, a fast or smooth talker The metaphor has nothing to do with forked tongues (as in the English idiom), which of course are characteristic of all snakes. Commentators offered several reasons the bronzeback in particular serves as the vehicle in this expression, including the idea that bronzeback tongues are (proportionally) longer than those of other snakes and dart in and out of the mouth more rapidly and more continually. Perhaps also relevant is the bronzeback’s reported use of its tongue to catch insect prey, especially if this common snake is observed to do so more regularly than other kinds of snakes. 436. Bronzeback whose tail alone remains Gala geze bholo ta’a éko (or ko’o éko) A person who is quick off the mark or in a great hurry

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

251

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 252

The phrase can be abbreviated as gala bholo éko (“bronzeback [with] only the tail [not moving]”), but the notion of “remaining (in place)” expressed by geze (“not yet, temporarily”) is implicit in both versions. As the fastest of snakes, Nage describe bronzebacks as moving so rapidly that, when awakened from sleep, their head and body will already be in motion while the tail remains coiled. How far this might be a deliberate exaggeration is unclear, but the apparent speed of the snakes, as I myself have witnessed, is certainly well founded, and the metaphor is in any case appropriate for a person who is faster than others to move into action. In a particularly cynical application, the phrase can refer to someone, especially a person not fond of work, who is always first to respond to a call to eat. In a more general vein, it can apply to anyone who is in too much of a hurry or who acts too hastily. 437. White (pale) bronzeback, Gala bha. See Snake in a hole (No. 421), Red monkey (No. 235) 438. Of the python tribe ‘Ili ko’o goka A greedy, voracious person Nage are familiar with two species of pythons (goka), Python reticulatus and P. timoriensis, which they distinguish as goka denu and goka leo. In this metaphor, the only one involving pythons, there is no indication that the vehicle is either kind in particular. “Clan” (woe or ‘ili woe) might be a more accurate translation of ‘ili, but “tribe” better expresses the sense in English. The metaphor turns on the fact that pythons swallow their food whole, consuming everything and leaving nothing behind. The metaphor may especially apply to avaricious people who covet other people’s possessions or who take the lion’s share of something, leaving little or nothing for others. Of course, other snakes also swallow food whole, but pythons are by far the largest of snakes and are known to Nage as swallowing relatively large animals, including young pigs. 439. Pit viper waiting for the stick, pit viper (should) expect to be struck Hiku napa bhole

252

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 253

A person who behaves recklessly in dealings with powerful people and so puts him- or herself in danger Hiku refers to the Island pit viper Cryptelytrops insularis (formerly Trimesurus albolabris), and the metaphor refers to someone who, in the common English idiom, is “asking for trouble.” As Nage explained, anyone encountering a pit viper, a venomous but usually unaggressive snake, should immediately grab a stick and strike it dead. In fact, Nage habitually kill all snakes, whether poisonous or not. But for obvious reasons they are especially assiduous when it comes to this very common species, so a pit viper should flee at the approach of a human, and especially one holding a stick. Napa, “to wait,” expresses a future state (see, e.g., napa poa, “in the morning, tomorrow morning”; and napa sa éno, “in a little while,” “presently”) and in the present expression suggests inevitability. Bhole can be translated either as “stick” or “to be struck, get the stick.” More elaborate variants recorded include ma’e kau bhia hiku napa bhole, “do not be like a viper waiting to be struck,” “do not put yourself in danger”; and imu bhia hiku napa bhole, “he is like a viper awaiting the stick,” “he is asking for trouble.” In Sikkanese (eastern Flores) apparently the same metaphor is translated as “pit viper that does not flee when about to be struck” (mea turung ‘oba; Pareira and Lewis 1998, 132). The metaphor is also known in the Keo region, immediately to the south of Nage (Tule 1998). 440. Rat Snake with red cheeks Sawa pipi to A person with a harsh manner or aggressive temperament to whom others acquiesce or follow out of fear Although applied to pythons in other Indonesian languages, sawa in Nage denotes the Indonesian rat snake Elaphe subradiata, a creature that, as its English name suggests, feeds mostly on rats and mice and is therefore frequently encountered inside houses and settlements. After first recording the phrase in the early 1990s, I long suspected it could be applied metaphorically to humans, but the only interpretation I ever obtained was that the expression described an especially aggressive snake that, moreover, did not actually have red cheeks. More recently, however, I recorded applications in the sense given

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

253

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 254

above, one by a man who assured me he had heard it used in the same way by his parents and grandparents (now all deceased). That the creature’s “red cheeks” are themselves metaphorical reveals a verbal identification of the colour red with anger that is found in various languages, including English (Kövecses 2010, 222).

LIZARDS Like many other languages, Nage has no general term for “lizard.” Nage distinguish five lizards by name: monitors (ghoa), skinks (mapa bonga), Tokay geckoes (teke), House lizards (or House geckoes, ana gu), and Flying lizards (kaka hika). Of these, two kinds – the House lizard and Flying lizard (Draco volans) – are not employed as metaphors, although both figure in other symbolic usages (Forth 2013). While the monitor lizard comes a close second, the species Nage most often employ as a metaphor is the Tokay gecko, a circumstance attributable to this relatively large lizard’s common occurrence inside buildings and its loud and distinctive call, a vocalization that has produced the onomatopoeic Nage name teke as well as Malay tokay and indeed English “gecko.” 441. Monitor lizard collecting black ants Ghoa dhaga mule A lazy person who expects to be fed by others The Water monitor Varanus salvator is by far the largest of the five kinds of lizards Nage distinguish by name. Although Tokay geckoes are occasionally consumed, the monitor is also the lizard most often hunted and eaten. Sometimes expressed as “having a mouth like a monitor lizard collecting ants” (wunu mumu bhia ghoa dhaga mule), the present metaphor turns on the behaviour of monitor lizards, which Nage describe as resting with their mouths open waiting for ants to enter. Dhaga means “to collect, accumulate,” as for example when youths go from house to house collecting rice for use in community-wide rituals. Like other monitor metaphors, the present expression implies a deceitful character since Nage describe ants that enter the lizard’s mouth as being fooled, thinking it is dead or sleeping. Mule refers specifically

254

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 255

to a kind of black ant, but it is unclear why this term should be used rather than metu, a more inclusive term for ants. 442. Monitor lizard tricks ants Ghoa ‘ole mule A person who ensnares other people As Nage commentary revealed, the imagery here, based on observation of monitor behaviour, is the same as that reflected in the previous metaphor (No. 441), although the local interpretation is different. 443. Monitor lizard that fools black ants with its bifurcate tongue Ghoa wole mule lema sanga dhua A person who misleads others with dishonest talk The expression combines two separate metaphors, “a monitor’s tongue” and “a monitor collecting ants” (Nos. 446 and 441). Wole, “to fool, trick,” is a variant of ‘ole. The metaphor is evidently motivated in part by the fact that the monitor deceives ants with its tongue, the same body part used by the human referent to deceive other people. 444. Monitor lizard’s footprints Pala ghoa Someone who misleads, sets a false trail Like virtually all monitor metaphors, this refers to a dishonest or deceitful person. More specific versions include: “do not be like a monitor’s tracks” (ma’e bhia pala ghoa) and “do not follow (believe) people who are like a monitor’s limbs” (ma’e dhéko bhia lima ghoa). Nage describe monitors’ feet as “turned the wrong way” (bhale sala) or “towards the back” (pago logo) so that their tracks can fool hunters. Although Nage sometimes speak as though monitors have fully inverted feet, this should be understood as a hyperbole, and a morphological basis for the idea can found in the way the lizard’s back feet, especially, often appear to point outwards from the body or even backwards. In addition, when Water monitors move, they place the “tarsal part of the foot on the ground first … [twisting] it as the body moves forward

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

255

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 256

and then [stamping] the toes on the ground, resulting in a (kind of) inverted footprint” (C. Ciofi pers. comm., cited in Forth 2013). Despite its apparently fantastic ring, therefore, both the notion that monitors have inverted feet and the derived metaphor have an obvious basis in empirical observation. 445. Monitor lizard’s penis Lasu ghoa A man who engages in indiscriminate sex Like male snakes, male monitor lizards possess hemipenes, bifurcate intromittent organs that allow them to mount females from either the left or right. The metaphor refers more specifically to a man who has intercourse both with women who are permitted as sexual (and marital) partners and women who are not. 446. Monitor lizard’s tongue Lema ghoa A person who says one thing on one occasion and something different on another, or someone who speaks dishonestly Unlike other lizards, monitor tongues are forked, like those of snakes. The metaphor is therefore comparable to “two-headed snake” (No. 426) and even more similar to English “speaking with a forked tongue.” A dishonest person can be more explicitly described as “having a tongue is like a monitor’s tongue” (lema kau bhia ko’o lema ghoa). 447. Skin like a monitor lizard Hu’i weki bhia ko’o ghoa A person (usually a man) with hard and rough skin An alternative expression is “back like a monitor” (logo bhia ghoa). Motivated simply by the quality of the lizard’s skin, the expression applies to shirtless men who labour in the sun as well as to people with a skin condition or people who do not bathe or have not bathed and whose skin is caked in dirt – thus replicating the mottled skin of the monitor. Hu’i weki translates literally as “skin of the body.”

256

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 257

448. Child of a skink Ana mapa bonga (or ana ko’o mapa bonga) A person whose paternity is unknown or who will not reveal his or her paternity Skinks are lizards composing the large and diverse herpetological family Scincidae, and comprise small to medium-sized lizards often encountered in or near Nage settlements. Calling someone “child of a skink” is based on a belief, found among Nage as among other eastern Indonesians, according to which skinks are able to impregnate female domestic pigs (Forth 2016, 298– 300). Piglets thus fathered are recognized by striping on the pelage similar to that found on the Many-lined skink Mabuya multifasciata, the most common referent of mapa bonga (ana is “child”), and moreover on infant wild pigs, ana wawi witu – a metaphor (No. 120) that, significantly, has much the same referent as “child of a skink.” 449. Skink pleads for help Mapa soba loa A person who claims great need and continually requests assistance from others The expression is mostly used for a person who persistently asks for something, thus becoming troublesome and annoying. Although some were uncertain of the referent, in the view of most Nage mapa is to be understood as a short form of the name mapa bonga, “skink.” It is also relevant that a minority regard mapa and bonga as names for two separate though similar kinds of lizards, while in some parts of the Keo region, mapa alone is the name for all skinks. The term loa means “to spill over, overflow, go beyond the bounds.” Soba can mean “to plead, earnestly request,” “claim to be in need,” “admit defeat,” or “to sigh, moan” (cf. soba mata, “to know that one will die,” “to bemoan one’s impending death”) and may be cognate with Ngadha and Lio soba, “to try, test” (Arndt 1961; Arndt 1933; cf. Indonesian coba, in the same senses). Only one commentator offered an interpretation of how the metaphor reflected the behaviour of skinks, claiming that in the Geo region, from where his wife derives, loa is hoa, a term referring to dry fallen leaves, and

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

257

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 258

that, accordingly, soba hoa (and thus soba loa) means “to get help from leaves.” He then explained that the phrase refers to skinks foraging on the ground after sunrise and every now and again ducking under large fallen leaves to protect themselves from predators. However, the informant also asserted that the usage referred not so much to someone who is in need as to a person who keeps stopping work in order to take a rest, talk to people, and so on. While this may sound rather unlikely, it should be noted that the man provided exactly the same exegesis when I questioned him again two years after our first conversation. 450. Skink’s mouth Mumu mapa A forest vine In one opinion the plant is so named because the edible fruits of the vine somehow resemble the mouth (mumu) of a skink, but other people I asked were uncertain whether mapa in this context referred to the lizard. For So’a, Verheijen (1990, 33) lists mumu mapa as Cynanchum, a genus of vines. 451. Biting like a Tokay gecko Kiki bhia teke (or Bhia kiki teke) A person who bites another in a fight; someone who holds onto something and will not let go Nage know geckoes for their powerful bite and ability to grip firmly with their strong teeth and jaws. Fights between spouses as well as fights between men or women can involve biting. Discussing this metaphor, one man mentioned how, when he was young, his mother once bit his father in the thigh and how the limb became so swollen that he was immobilized for a month. In the second sense another commentator suggested that the phrase could be used for a stingy person, a sense also covered by an invertebrate metaphor (No. 501). 452. Eyeballs like gecko’s eggs Ana mata bhia telo teke A person with round, bulging eyes or someone who stares wide-eyed

258

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 259

Tokay gecko’s eggs are white and round and not much smaller than human eyeballs. 453. Gecko at the top of a dalu tree that is difficult to climb Teke tolo dalu gho ghedo pau A person who makes a great effort but is frustrated and unable to advance Nage describe the trunks of dalu trees (Albizia sp.) as slippery and having loose bark, thus making climbing difficult, so the expression depicts a lizard in a tree that is unable either to climb further up or come down. It provides yet another instance of a circle-dance lyric in which singers tease or deride (néke) members of the opposite sex. According to one interpretation, the metaphor refers to a man unsuccessfully climbing a house post in an attempt to enter the dwelling of an unmarried woman, whereas from a male perspective it suggests a woman who is unable to draw the attention of a man. 454. Gecko high in a banyan tree cries in lamentation Teke tolo nunu polu kasi ku A person lamenting, or who bemoans his or her lot, or otherwise speaks in a sorrowful or melancholic voice Also expressed as teke hodo nunu (hodo, tree cavity), the metaphor occurs in songs accompanying circle-dancing. Nage remarked how the phrase, like others in this genre, causes people to remember spouses and kin who have died. Tokay geckoes are commonly found in banyan trees, whose cavities may house numerous geckoes. One commentator noted how these cavities are narrow, restricted places, so that the metaphor could be understood as an allusion to limitations imposed by ill fortune. In the same connection, another man stated that vocalizations of Tokay geckoes occupying banyans differ from such geckoes heard inside houses. Although the gecko’s call, and especially the longer descending note that completes a series of cries, might be experienced as melancholic, no one I questioned seemed to concur in this. The onomatopoeic name of the lizard, teke, also means “circle-dance,” but this is apparently a homonym reflecting a different root and has no definite connection with references to geckoes in circle-dance songs. In regard to the dance, in which performers move in a circle clinging on to one another’s

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

259

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 260

shoulders, the term probably derives from teke in the sense of “to hold (onto), grasp.” Interestingly, geckoes are known for their grasping ability (see No. 455), but the lizard’s name is sufficiently explained by onomatopoeia. 455. Hands (arms) of a Tokay gecko Lima teke A person who is agile, especially an experienced climber or a man skilled at grasping and holding onto things People thus spoken of can be described variously as “having arms like a gecko” or more simply “being like a gecko.” Like other Indonesian languages, Nage does not distinguish hands from arms, both of which they call lima. Denoting the arms and hands of humans, lima is also used for the corresponding parts of lizards. However, the metaphor is more specifically motivated by the adhesive pads on the gecko’s “hands” and feet, which allow the lizards to hold things firmly, climb vertical services with ease, and even walk upside down under tree branches or inside buildings. A special application of the metaphor dating from the colonial period, when the Dutch introduced Western ball games, is to someone skilled in catching and holding onto things thrown or kicked, such as a soccer ball. Accordingly, there is a notion that a person who wants to become a proficient goal-keeper should eat geckoes’ forelimbs, and Nage say of someone skilled in goal-keeping “you have eaten gecko arms” (kau pesa lima teke). But whether or how often this is actually done as a form of homeopathic magic is unclear. (By contrast, Nage do eat gecko flesh as a cure for respiratory ailments.) Where lima teke refers specifically to someone skilled in climbing trees, it is synonymous with “legs and arms of a monkey” (No. 216). 456. Male gecko Teke lalu A man whose wife is larger than him The metaphor is applied mainly in jest to husbands whose wives are fat or otherwise large-bodied. The usage was known only to two brothers who claimed to know about the relative size of male and female geckoes from observing mating pairs. The idea that male geckoes, like the males of some other

260

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 261

reptiles, are larger than the females appears quite widespread in central Flores (somewhat contrary to an earlier report, Forth 2013). The notion is not clearly grounded in herpetological fact. However, since the two brothers mentioned it independently of one another, there is no reason to suspect fabrication. In addition, a man from a closely neighbouring village also knew the expression, although he was unfamiliar with this interpretation. Even so, it seems to be a relatively “private metaphor” that, like a private joke, is current only within a small circle of people. 457. Tokay gecko’s teeth Ngi’i teke A person who is strong and resolute or tenacious; the nicked blade of a knife The metaphor derives from the firm bite of the Tokay gecko. Nage thus remark how snakes should be wary when attacking a gecko as the lizard can bite its attacker in the throat and not let go, thereby disabling and eventually killing the snake. They also say that when a Tokay gecko bites a person, the lizard must be killed in order to release its grip, and that when catching a gecko, one must grasp it by the back of the neck to avoid being bitten. According to an idea evidently less grounded in empirical observation, a gecko will let go only if it hears a thunder clap. In the same vein, rows of serrations called “gecko’s teeth,” customarily carved on sacrificial posts (peo) and decorated house posts, are described as symbols of strength, tenacity, and endurance. And similarly suggesting human tenacity is the expression “like the teeth of a gecko (that) never lets go” (bhia ngi’i teke ea talo). Alluding to the same resemblance with the saw-like teeth of geckoes, “a blade like gecko’s teeth” is one with a series of nicks that is much in need of sharpening. 458. Gecko goby Tebhu teke A kind of freshwater fish with a large head like that of a Tokay gecko This is another instance of a folk-taxonomic name incorporating the name of a quite different animal. Tebhu (or ana tebhu) denotes another kind of goby (Forth 2016, 212–13).

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

261

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 262

459. Gecko’s back Logo teke A growth stage of maize This applies when maize is nearly ripe and leaves enclosing the cobs are marked like the skin on a gecko’s back.

FISH 460. Fish in the boat Ika wawo kowa Something that is already accomplished or is already certain, a sure thing As Nage never fish from vessels, their territory containing no rivers or other bodies of water large enough to require or facilitate these, the present metaphor has evidently been adopted from some coastal region. Fish in the boat are of course fish that have already been caught, so the expression is comparable to English “bird in the hand” and “in the bag” – a phrase originally alluding to small game a hunter has killed and placed in a bag. Wawo kowa literally means “on top of the boat” but refers to the inside of a boat, conceived in relation to the water below. 461. Fish in water Ika one ae A person who moves about aimlessly or in an unpredictable manner The source of this metaphor is fish swimming hither and yon, moving in one direction for a short while before quickly changing course. In one instance, it was applied to groups of young men described disapprovingly as avoiding work and wandering about aimlessly. 462. Fish in water resting and pretending to be asleep Ika one ae ézu podi nade A person who appears to be inactive and not paying attention but, contrary to this impression, suddenly responds or takes action

262

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 263

The expression occurs in a song lyric. Although both nade and ézu mean “to sleep, be asleep,” the second term is the more common usage in dialects to the east and northeast of central Nage, and also in central Keo. Applied for example to a person who seems not to be listening to a discussion but then unexpectedly begins to participate, the metaphor turns on the image of a fish, motionless and seemingly asleep, that suddenly swims off. 463. Dolphin down by the coast Lobhu lau ma’u A person who is always disappearing and reappearing; an impotent man unable to maintain an erection Although dolphins are marine mammals, Nage loosely classify them as “fish” (ika). Less often rendered as “dolphin down in the sea” (lobhu lau mesi), or simply as “like a dolphin” (bhia ko’o lobhu), the metaphor reflects the animal’s habit of bounding out of the water and immediately submerging, only to emerge again. A common modern application, both in Nage and the Keo region (where I also recorded the metaphor), is to truant children who attend school irregularly. In reference to male impotence, “down by the coast” can partly be understood as an allusion to the lower part of the body and the genital region and, more specifically still, to the penis, which, like a dolphin, may rise up but in an impotent man quickly descends. Many central Nage are familiar with lobhu only as the name of a sea creature of a kind unknown. In fact, they are more familiar with dolphin flesh, occasionally sold in highland markets and said to taste like buffalo or deer. Evidently, then, the metaphor, although nowadays in wide use among Nage, ultimately derives from a coastal region. 464. Wanting (only) shark’s liver Mo’o ate iu (or hai wai ate iu) A person who is given something but demands something better Although very few Nage have tasted shark’s liver, some know its reputation as an extremely rich and tasty dish, an assessment shared by eastern Indonesian coastal peoples. From this derives the further expression “sweet (tasty, delicious) like a shark’s liver” (mi bhia ate iu) and, in regard to its richness, a

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

263

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 264

claim that a single small piece is a sufficient complement for a large plate of rice. One application of the metaphor is in describing or rebuking children who continually ask for things but are never satisfied with what they receive. Given the rarity of shark’s liver in central Nage, the phrase also implies an object that is extravagant and difficult to obtain. At the same time, sharks’ livers are not likely to be a food regularly consumed anywhere on Flores Island, so assuming that the metaphor derives from a coastal region, this implication would also be entailed in the metaphor as employed elsewhere. Shark’s liver plays a central role in an eastern Sumbanese version of a myth, widely known in eastern Indonesia, relating the origin of the dugong (Dugong dugon). In the Sumbanese tale, a man catches a shark and wants to reserve the liver for himself, but while he is absent, his wife cooks the liver and gives it to her hungry children. On returning home and discovering what has happened, the husband savagely beats the wife, who in order to bathe her wounds, enters the sea, and after remaining partly submerged for a time, gradually transforms into the sea mammal (Forth 1988). This version of the myth, however, seems to be unknown on Flores. 465. Goby in shallow water Ana bo ae ‘ete A person who is out of breath Since in most contexts Nage contrast gobies with “fish” (ika), the relationship between these freshwater fish and the more general category is rather complex (Forth 2016, 211–16), and I list this and the following two metaphors under “fish” simply as a matter of convenience. The commonest referent of the present expression is someone who tries to speak when exhausted and gasping for breath, so that his or her speech is faltering and unclear. It can also refer to people who open and close their mouths in response to food that is too hot or too spicy. Ana bo is another name for ana tebhu (Sicyopterus sp.), a freshwater goby. The metaphor draws on the image of weir fishing where, after fish and other creatures have entered, the weir is drained, thus leaving fish gasping for air and rapidly opening and closing their mouths. ‘Ete is “to drain,” “drained, dried up.”

264

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 265

466. Loach goby Kaka watu A small child who clings to his or her mother Consistent with the name kaka watu, meaning “sticks to rocks,” the Loach goby (Rhyacichthys aspro) is a fish with a flattened head and ventral mouth that attaches itself to stones at the bottom of rivers and streams using its broadened pelvic and pectoral fins as well as its head and snout (Larson 2011, 55). The behaviour thus provides an appropriate metaphor for a child who is too “clinging,” which is to say, too much attached to his or her mother. An apparent botanical equivalent is “fungus on dead wood” (ki’i tolo fata), although this can additionally refer to anyone who stays long in a single place. 467. Catching various things and coming across a Loach goby ‘A’i ‘a’i jeka ko’o kaka watu Someone who in the course of an activity encounters something positive and unexpected or requiring exceptional luck to obtain Nowadays, “luck” is usually expressed with the Indonesian term rejeki, “luck, good fortune,” rendered by Nage as reja ki. Nage say Loach gobies usually occur only in larger rivers and are extremely rare in smaller rivers or streams. The source of the metaphor is thus people fishing in small streams expecting to catch crustaceans, eels, or other gobies but, in addition or instead, catch a Loach goby. The idea that these gobies occur far less often in smaller streams than in larger rivers appears inconsistent with ichthyological evidence, according to which they live in very swift rocky streams (Larson 2011, 55). However, Larson also describes the fish as very difficult to catch, and it may be this, rather than their rarity in small streams, that accounts for the notion that catching one requires exceptionally good fortune. 468. Head like a gecko goby Ulu bhia ko’o tebhu teke A person with a disproportionately large head The goby’s large head resembles the head of a Tokay gecko. The metaphor thus compares a large-headed person to a large-headed fish (see No. 458), although it can also be used as a gratuitous or “friendly” insult.

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

265

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 266

469. Dense as fish fry in the estuary, Kapa bhia ipu lau nanga. See Numerous as black ants in the hills (No. 510) 470. Fish fry at one end of a pool sees many people and pretends to be crazy Ipu lau éko tiwu tei tei riwu imu rona podi bingu A person who sees members of the opposite sex and starts acting peculiarly in order to attract their attention Ipu denotes the fry of various freshwater fish that enter estuaries and ascend rivers in certain months of the year, when they are caught in great numbers.1 The expression is a lyric usually sung to accompany circle-dancing and, like others of this genre, is used to tease or deride (néke) people of the opposite sex. Commenting on rona, the dialectal form of central Nage ‘ona (“to make” or “cause”), Nage suggested the expression may derive from Réndu or Dhawe, both regions further seaward where ipu are more common. Riwu is similarly more often used than ‘iwu (“mass, many people”), thus once again illustrating a special occurrence of the /r/ that is not heard in everyday speech. Bingu can be understood as either “crazy, deranged” or “confused.” Ola can be inserted between rona and podi, thus producing rona ola podi bingu, which would translate as “to make an act of pretended craziness or derangement.” In any event, the expression conveys the sense of someone making a spectacle of him- or herself in order to gain attention. Why fish fry are employed in the metaphor no one could explain, but it could conceivably relate to the bustle caused by the appearance of fry in rivers and large numbers of people converging to harvest the swarming fish. 471. Fish fry have their pools, monkeys have their gathering places Ipu ne’e tiwu, ‘o’a ne’e loka People belonging to different communities have different customs Loka can refer to anywhere that monkeys gather but also to a gathering of monkeys, or a troop. Applied to humans, it denotes a location set aside for a particular activity or performance (e.g., loka to’a lako or loka mao, a hunting shrine; loka etu, a demarcated field where pugilistic competitions are held; loka tua, a palm gin distillery). Employed as a proverb, the parallelistic expression is comparable to Indonesian lain kolam, lain ikan, “different pools,

266

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 267

different fish,” and lain padang, lain belalang, “different fields, different grasshoppers.” It also recalls the American English “different strokes for different folks.” A prosodic influence is evident in the assonance of ipu (fry) and tiwu (pool) and ‘o’a (monkey) and loka (place).

EELS Nage do not classify eels as fish (ika). The two eel metaphors I recorded both focus on the slipperiness of eels. 472. Eel without slime Tuna ta’a una mona Someone without possibilities or whose situation is difficult, dire, or desperate Nage una is curious. While also designating rough, scaly, or blistered human skin (see logo una, “blistered back”), the term is related to words in other Malayo-Polynesian languages meaning “(fish) scale” (Blust and Trussel 2010), but the Nage term refers to slime, or specifically a layer of slime on an eel’s skin. As Nage recognize, unlike fish, eels do not have scales, and fish scales are in any case called by an unrelated word, dila. An eel’s slime, as commentators pointed out, is its primary means of protection, making it difficult for humans or other animals to catch and hold onto the creatures. Thus just as an eel without slime would be largely defenceless, so a person in a comparable state would be similarly powerless and vulnerable. Apart from people otherwise lacking in possibilities, Nage interpreted the metaphor as also referring to someone who strives but without result and so remains poor or otherwise deficient, and is therefore disregarded by others. 473. Slippery as an eel Ngélu bhia tuna A devious or treacherous person Nage ngélu, “slippery,” is metaphorically identical to the English word, as is the entire metaphor to English “slippery as an eel.” Indonesian licin similarly covers both meanings, being glossed by Echols and Shadily (1989) both as

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

267

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 268

“slippery, slick” and as “smooth, smooth-tongued; cunning, crafty.” If not slippery eels, then the use of “slipperiness” to describe an abstract human quality likely has a very widespread occurrence cross-culturally.

FROGS Frog metaphors incorporate two named categories: tu gea, denoting the Brown bullfrog Kaloula baleata, and pake, a more general term for frogs. Nage regard tadpoles (ana fe) not as immature frogs but as essentially different creatures that nevertheless transform into frogs. As a component of their name, therefore, ana does not mean “child(ren)” nor does unanalyzable fe mean “frog,” and I include the single Nage tadpole metaphor in the present section not for reasons of folk taxonomy but merely for convenience. 474. Belly of a bullfrog Tuka tu gea A person with a bloated or distended abdomen The body of the Brown bullfrog (tu gea) inflates considerably when it vocalizes, a feature Nage regularly mention when distinguishing this frog from others. 475. Bullfrog holding its breath Tu neke ngai A person with a large belly; someone who has difficulty breathing; a person who makes him- or herself appear more powerful than he or she actually is in order to impress others or threaten adversaries More recent evidence dispels previously registered doubt (Forth 2016, 221) that tu, a lexeme with several meanings, refers in this context to the Brown bullfrog, more completely known as tu gea. In all senses, the metaphor is motivated by the bullfrog’s habit of inflating its body. In the first sense, referents include a woman in late pregnancy and someone severely constipated. In the second, the phrase refers to a person suffering from lung disease and who, somewhat like an inflated frog, holds his or her breath or is unable fully to exhale. Also relevant here is the Nage idea that consuming the flesh of the Brown

268

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 269

bullfrog can relieve lung disorders (nowadays usually referred to as “asthma”) and a children’s pastime that involves holding a bullfrog and reciting tu tu neke ngai, tu tu neke ngai as the frog’s belly expands further and further. The third and more abstract sense of the metaphor recalls the semantically similar English idioms “to puff oneself up,” “to puff up one’s chest,” and “puffed-up.” Nage describe the Brown bullfrog as inflating its body not only while vocalizing but, more deliberately, to scare off enemies. 476. Eyeballs like a squeezed frog Ana mata bhia pake kese A person with round, bulging eyes The usage is synonymous with “eyes like gecko’s eggs” (No. 452). 477. Frog inside a bamboo tube Pake one tobho A statement for which evidence is lacking, or whose source and therefore value is indeterminate The metaphor turns on the image of a vocalizing frog hidden inside a container: its call (the “statement”) can be heard but the creature cannot be seen, nor perhaps can one know from where exactly the sound is coming. Reflecting a general value Nage place on the visual sense as a source of accurate knowledge (Forth 2016), commentators compared the metaphor to Indonesian kabar angin (literally, “wind news,” “news brought by the wind”), referring to a rumour or unsubstantiated report. In terms of imagery, however, the expression bears a greater similarity to Indonesian “frog under a half coconut shell” (katak dalam tempurung), although this has a different meaning – namely, people whose knowledge is limited because their vision or experience is restricted. The Indonesian metaphor also occurs in a Sikkanese expression, ganu bla’ur deri é’i korak (Pareira and Lewis n.d., 92, s.v. katak), but no interpretation is provided for this. 478. Frog that has taken a great leap Pake bago méze A person who, after attaining a high position, no longer considers the interests of relatives and associates

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

269

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 270

Commentators remarked how a person who has thus risen not only will no longer help his fellows but may even exploit them – or “eat their eggs (spawn)” as this was once expressed. One man gave as an example people who have attained modern political office or high-ranking positions in the civil service. However, no other evidence suggests the metaphor is modern or could not apply in traditional contexts. The Nage expression largely parallels English “to leapfrog (over someone or something),” meaning “to move ahead of someone” and often used for a person who is promoted over someone of higher rank (Palmatier 1995, 230). Previously (Forth 2016) I showed how pake bago (“leaping frog”) can be interpreted as a named taxon (specifically a folk-varietal) comprising an unidentified kind of large frog. However, in the present metaphor it seems to refer to any sort of frog (pake). 479. Frog of two rivers Pake lowo dhua A person with divided loyalties, a person who maintains residence in two different places The two interpretations are closely related since, among Nage, being resident in two different places (villages) generally involves being simultaneously obligated to two different groups. The metaphor always implies a negative evaluation and is comparable to English “running with the fox and hunting with the hounds.” More specific interpretations offered by commentators included simultaneously claiming membership of two different clans – a phenomenon actually quite common in central Nage but openly disapproved by many people – and being married to two women (bhia ta’a fai dhua dhua, “to be like a man with two wives”), a situation that, since co-wives were usually housed in separate dwellings, formerly would usually require a man to divide his time between two different houses and villages. (“Like a man with two wives,” it should be noted, is itself a metaphor insofar as it is used in a more general reference to divided loyalties.) Since mass conversion to Catholicism, polygyny has become disapproved by Nage, although it still occasionally occurs. Other interpretations suggested the metaphor could apply to a procrastinator or a person unable to make a choice between two alternatives, but I am unsure how often it is used in this sense.

270

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 271

480. Frogs calling Pake polu A number of people all talking at once, a noisy gathering The basis of the metaphor is the fact that frog vocalizations are mostly noticed when a large number of frogs are calling at the same time. Interestingly, this behaviour suggests the kind of frog named tu gea (the Brown bullfrog) as opposed to other frogs called pake. Pake, however, is also employed in a broader sense that includes the bullfrogs. 481. Frogs have livers, crayfish have bellies Pake ne’e ate, kuza ne’e tuka Everyone should consider and be well disposed to their fellows This is sometimes rendered the other way around, as “crayfish have bellies, frogs have livers.” Nage speak of the liver (ate) and the belly (tuka) as the sites of thought and feelings, and they sometimes combine these as tuka ate (“belly [and] liver”) when referring to psychological qualities or qualities of character often expressed with ate alone (as in ate méze, literally “big livered”). As among other Indonesian peoples, “liver” for Nage is symbolically equivalent to “heart” among English and other European speakers. A common proverb, the expression is used when admonishing people who act in a thoughtless, unfeeling way by pointing out that “even frogs and crayfish” (éle pake ne’e ate) have thoughts and feelings (specifically for other frogs and crayfish). As crayfish and frogs are small aquatic animals, their selection here appears partly motivated by their representation as lowly creatures, otherwise inferior to humans, but who in their consideration of creatures of the same kind nevertheless compare favourably to an unfeeling or ungenerous human. Attesting to the figurative character of this expression, Nage, as I was able to confirm, do not regard crayfish or frogs as particularly thoughtful or feeling creatures, hence the usage cannot be adduced as evidence of any animistic ontology. In fact, as much as anything the selection of pake (frogs) and kuza (crayfish) reflects prosodic considerations and, particularly, the assonance of the two animal names and ate (“liver,” or metaphorically, “heart”) and tuka (“belly”), respectively.

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

271

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 272

482. Hair like a frog’s fingers (digits) Fu bhia kanga pake Human head hair that is unwashed or uncombed Other than their being long and thin, what might link frog digits in particular with such hair is uncertain. But additional factors could be their shiny or greasy appearance and bulbous tips, which might be compared with knots or tangles in dishevelled or matted head hair. 483. Frog pig Wawi pake A variety of wild pig Recorded just once, the term refers to a kind of pig reputedly able to jump into thick forest vines or tree branches when pursued by hunting dogs. Such pigs are more often called wawi kua (see No. 324) and, in the ‘Ua region, wawi take (Forth 2016, 97). 484. Tadpole with its mouth open feeding on dirt Ana fe ta nganga zaki A shiftless person who eats at others’ expense Nganga means “to open the mouth to receive food,” while zaki more specifically refers to human body dirt. The image conveyed is that of a creature with its mouth regularly open, depending on others for sustenance, hence the phrase serves as an apt metaphor for a sponger or free-loader. As tadpoles breathe through gills like fish, their throats move regularly through pulsing, thus apparently giving the impression of eating. Zaki may be especially appropriate as it can be understood specifically as a reference to dirt that accumulates on the body of someone engaging in physical labour and from whose efforts an idler might derive sustenance.

CROCODILE Crocodiles, more specifically marine crocodiles Crocodylus porosus, no longer occur within territories to which central Nage have regular access, but they

272

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 273

did so until the 1950s, when they would ascend far up the river Ae Sésa (Forth 2016, 221–4). As the following attests, they still survive in several conventional metaphors. 485. Crocodile Ngebu A greedy, rapacious or avaricious person; a man who constantly chases women, a lecher Specific applications of the metaphor combine greed for food or other material things with an excessive sexual appetite, thus reflecting the universal symbolic equation of eating and sexual intercourse. As other metaphors suggest, Nage regard crocodiles as voracious eaters, and in the first sense this metaphor is synonymous with No. 488. 486. Crocodile down by the coast, there is nothing it does not desire Ngebu lau mau, mona apa bau A philanderer who will engage any woman in intercourse While this usage depicts the crocodile as given specifically to sexual excess, it is not clear that Nage regard this as an actual attribute of the creature, and the metaphor more likely owes more to the symbolic equation of food and sex mentioned in regard to No. 485. As discussed with reference to the dolphin metaphor (No. 463), “down by the coast” can have a double meaning, denoting both the environment of saltwater crocodiles and the lower part of the body (where of course the genitalia are located). One variant of a complementary expression is “gogo up on the volcano, there is nothing that will satisfy it (or, that it will refuse)” (gogo zéle lobo mona apa mozo), a reference to a legendary and now extinct group of hominoids represented as gluttons and reputed once to have lived high on the slopes of the Ebu Lobo volcano (Forth 2008). 487. Crocodile of the lower regions Ngebu ngeda People who spend all or most of their time in the fields

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

273

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 274

The expression is largely synonymous with uta tua, “vegetables and palm wine,” meaning basic foodstuffs – a disparaging reference to people who are primarily occupied in subsistence activities and so rarely leave their gardens. From Bo’a Wae and other central Nage villages, ngeda refers to seaward regions where much agricultural land is located, and being the place of larger rivers as well, it was also here that Nage would formerly encounter crocodiles. As the metaphor refers more specifically to people preoccupied with subsistence tasks – or who, as Nage say, “only work or live to eat” – it partly reflects a representation of crocodiles as voracious eaters. Like other metaphors employing crocodiles, the phrase is derogatory since it depicts people who “live in the fields” – either in lone field huts or clusters of such huts, typically distant from villages (bo’a) – as being of low status and as not involving themselves in collective rituals and other affairs of the village. It is also one of several metaphors that reveal a negative evaluation of the seaward direction (lau; see Nos. 36, 87, 103, 164). According to one commentator, ngebu ngeda is a misconstrual of ngibu ngeda, where ngibu means “to hide oneself, stay hidden.” If this is correct, most people at present nevertheless understand the phrase as ngebu ngeda and thus as a reference to the crocodile. Also reflecting a general understanding of the phrase as a reference to crocodiles, another informant provided a more elaborate interpretation, claiming it applied not just to people who live more or less permanently outside of established villages but also to people thus domiciled who steal crops and also livestock – as, in the case of livestock, crocodiles also once did. 488. Of the crocodile tribe ‘Ili ko’o ngebu A greedy person The metaphor is considered synonymous with “of the python tribe” (No. 438) and reflects the same motivation. How accurate the reputation for greed of either crocodiles or pythons may be is debatable. On the one hand, hungry crocodiles will quickly devour the entire carcass of a large animal; on the other, like pythons and other reptiles, they can go without food for considerable lengths of time.

274

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 275

489. Crocodile’s tail Éko ngebu The zig-zag pattern or series of serrations carved along the outer branches of a forked sacrificial post (peo) Whether the motif is intended to represent anything in particular is unclear, and it is quite possible that the sawback pattern is named only for its resemblance to the bony scutes on a crocodile’s back rather than an original intention to render part of the posts in the shape of a crocodile because of some quality that crocodiles represent for Nage (Forth 1994; see also No. 457).

SEA TURTLE Although freshwater turtles appear to have been present in more easterly parts of Flores during the twentieth century (Forth 2017c; Forth 2018d) and may still survive in some places, before the advent of mass media these animals were unknown in central Nage. By contrast, marine turtles have evidently been known for a long time, even though, as sea creatures, they are of course extra-territorial. Nage call turtles kea, the same name applied to cockatoos, although deriving from a different protoform, and to distinguish the marine reptiles they specify them as kea mesi, “sea kea” (Forth 2016, 224–6). 490. Sea turtle that turns its head from side to side while being butchered Kea mézo keti A person who appears perplexed or disoriented, not knowing where to turn for assistance As a highland people with little direct knowledge of killing and butchering turtles, Nage have evidently borrowed this metaphor from coastal populations. The expression alludes to the behaviour of turtles that, after being captured and brought to shore, will move their heads from side to side in an apparent state of bewilderment while their flesh is being cut into strips (keti). As some Nage know, and as I also heard from coastal Lio, a turtle’s head and eyes will still move for some time after the animal is slaughtered, and even after the head is severed. For this reason, Lio wawi kéra, “(sea) turtle pig,”

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

275

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 276

refers to pig meat that “still moves” after the carcass is butchered (Forth fieldnotes 2017). 491. Turtle tuber Kebu kéra A kind of wild tuber Kéra is the term for marine turtles in the Ngadha and Lio languages, and Nage interpreted it here as a reference to turtles. In addition, commentators explained the name as describing the shape of the tuber, which in contrast to other tubers called kebu, which are generally round, are elliptical like the shell of a turtle. Conclusions and Comparisons For a variety reasons that should not need rehearsing, it is highly unlikely people anywhere who are familiar with snakes do not make some symbolic use of them. English metaphors that employ “snake” or “serpent” as a reference to a treacherous, malicious, or worthless person (Palmatier 1995, 338, 354) are well known, and, reflecting a broader European tradition, have undoubtedly been influenced by the Old Testament. As seen above, Nage snake metaphors are similarly negative. Yet this observation applies to their animal metaphors generally, and, moreover, metaphors exploiting snakes appear more diverse in their range of interpretations than do Western snake metaphors. As discussed previously for birds, several factors affect which snake categories are employed as metaphors and, among those that are, which are employed more extensively. Especially interesting is further evidence for a correlation between metaphorical use and monomial naming. Thus, besides nipa (“snake”), the five individual snake kinds deployed metaphorically are named with single lexemes (ba, gala, goka, hiku, and sawa), and the only monomially designated snake not employed metaphorically is goko, the socalled “Flying snake” Chrysopelea sp.2 Contrariwise, the only binomially (or trinomially) designated snake that occurs as a metaphor is nipa ulu pali, the “two-headed snake,” but since here the metaphor coincides with the entire name – comprising the word for snake (nipa) plus a modifying phrase –

276

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 277

syntactically this hardly differs from an expression like “snake coiled in a hole” (No. 420). On the other hand, neither naming nor empirical factors clearly explain the absence or paucity of some snakes among Nage metaphors. Pythons (goka) are by far the largest snakes known to Nage and are prominent in other ways – practically, as a source of medicine and, since the 1970s, as food (Forth 2016, 195–8) and, symbolically, as the principal embodiment of forest spirits – and yet pythons provide the vehicle of just one metaphor. In addition, there is no reason to believe that pythons are focal to any of the snake metaphors that simply specify nipa (“snake”). Goko, the Flying snake, is not a metaphor even though the snake is definitely familiar to Nage, partly because of its curious ability to “fly” (casting itself from treetops and gliding) but also because of its habit of stealing hen’s eggs. All the same, goko also ranked low in Nage free-lists, whereas the five kinds mentioned earliest and most frequently in the lists – sawa (rat snake), goka (python), ba (Russell’s viper), hiku (pit viper), and gala (bronzeback; Forth 2016, 190) – are precisely the five that occur in Nage metaphors. This evidence attests to what may seem a common-sense connection between the extent to which people are familiar with animals and their metaphorical deployment. Yet it does not explain why metaphors employing ba and gala, the third and fifth in the recall lists, are more numerous than expressions incorporating the other three, which in fact provide just one metaphor each. Among lizards, the two largest kinds, both common, provide the most metaphors. These are the Water monitor (ghoa) and the Tokay gecko (teke), the vehicles of seven and nine metaphors, respectively. Both lizards are also monomially named. Of the three remaining lizards, all named binomially, the skink, mapa bonga, is the source of just three metaphors, and, interestingly enough, in two of these the creature’s name is abbreviated to mapa. The other two, the House lizard and Flying lizard, occur in no metaphors at all. As with the non-metaphorical Flying snake (goko), the Flying lizard’s unusual method of locomotion evidently has not inspired any use as a verbal symbol. Although it is the smallest lizard, the absence of the House lizard from Nage metaphors is perhaps more curious as, being ubiquitous inside houses, it is by far the most frequently encountered. Apart from those incorporating ika, “fish (in general),” Nage metaphors employing creatures they classify as fish incorporate just six of a much larger

SNAKES, LIZARDS, FISH, FROGS, AND MORE

277

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 278

number of categories. Two of these, moreover, are marine creatures – lobhu (dolphin) and iu (shark) – neither of which is particularly familiar to central Nage, while of the remainder, comprising more familiar freshwater fish, three are named binomially (ana bo, kaka watu, and tebhu teke). The sixth is ipu, “fish fry.” None of four non-exotic freshwater fish known to Nage (Forth 2016, 212, table 9.2) occurs as a metaphor, but apart from their recent introduction, this is consistent with their names – all binomials incorporating ika (fish). In contrast, frogs, although they are small and relatively unremarkable creatures with few practical uses, provide the vehicles of a relatively high number of Nage animal metaphors – ten, or eleven if the single metaphor incorporating “tadpole” (ana fe) is included.3

278

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 279

7 Metaphors with Bugs: Insects and Other Invertebrates

Discussed in this chapter are seventy-five metaphorical expressions incorporating invertebrates – mostly creatures known to the majority of anglophones as “insects” or “bugs.” Unlike “bird,” “snake,” “fish,” “mammal,” and even “lizard,” invertebrates do not compose a single life form for Nage, or any kind of discrete folk taxon more inclusive than the folk-generic. Forth (2016, 329–40) records 113 invertebrate folk-generics (e.g. poi, “grasshopper”; fua, “wasp”) and sixty-four named folk-specifics (e.g., poi godo, a small greenish grasshopper; fua ‘ége ngéke, literally “narrow-waisted wasp”), thus making a total of 177 categories prospectively employable as conventional metaphors. Nage, however, employ just fifty-one of these. Palmatier (1995) identifies forty-four invertebrates used in English metaphors (including “insect” and “spider”), thus not many fewer than in Nage. Curiously, though, Nage metaphors do not include butterflies and moths or, with one arguable exception (No. 533), spiders.1 The fifty-one invertebrate categories employed in Nage metaphors include forty-five folk-generics and six folk-specifics, a fact reflecting the proportionally higher number of named folk-specific taxa in Nage invertebrate taxonomy. Even so, in comparison to other animals, invertebrates are metaphorically underexploited, a circumstance mostly attributable to their small size. What is more, thirty-four of the total fifty-one, including all six of the folk-specifics, occur in just a single metaphor. By contrast, only two mammal categories are used just once – ngo ngoe (No. 155) and dhéke laghi (No. 192) – while the comparable figures for birds are nineteen of forty-nine, and for reptiles and other non-mammalian vertebrates, eight of twenty-two.

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 280

Below I list invertebrates in the same sequence employed in Forth (2016, 329–40), with English translations of individual metaphors listed alphabetically. As was also done in the earlier book, and in order to facilitate comparison between expressions incorporating the same creatures, several kinds of invertebrates are further grouped together under general headings, including grasshoppers and crickets, wasps, ants, and others.

GRASSHOPPERS and CRICKETS • Orthoptera 492. Grasshoppers clustering around dog faeces Poi ligo ta’i lako A person or a group of people immediately drawn to something Like “flies swarming around a sore” (No. 518), the metaphor is essentially the same as English “bees around a honey pot,” or “flies round a dung heap.” Of several kinds of grasshoppers and locusts Nage distinguish by name, one is called “dog faeces grasshopper” (poi ta’i lako), the specific source of the present expression. 493. Little grasshopper Poi sunu ki A small, sickly child The more specific referent is children who are stunted or small for their age as well as not particularly healthy. Poi sunu ki is a folk taxonomic name, denoting a small green kind of grasshopper with a sharp or protruding snout. This last feature would appear to be reflected in the name as sunu ki refers to small, newly emerged, and rather sharp sprouts of Imperata grass (Imperata cyclindrica; Nage ki). Nage, however, disagree over the name, and the original form may be sulu ki, “alighting vertically on Imperata grass stems,” an attributed behaviour of this species, which is further described as being as small or thin as an Imperata stalk. Because the grasshopper is smaller than other kinds of grasshopper, the metaphor is nevertheless in both cases appropriate to a child who is especially small. By the same token, the usage is reminiscent

280

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 281

of American English “knee high to a grasshopper,” although this usually refers to a child who is very young (Palmatier 1995, 224) rather than to one whose growth is retarded. 494. Thighs of a grasshopper Pa’a poi A person who is extremely thin and weak In the form “your thighs are like the thighs of a grasshopper,” the phrase is used to deprecate and taunt adversaries. In a famous oration, a sort of diatribe (bhea) ascribed to Lowa Bata, the ancestor of the clan Deu in the village of Tolo Pa, the phrase complements “having the crown of a rhinoceros beetle” (No. 524). 495. While harvesting look to the front where the little godo grasshopper kicks, (but) do not forget to look to the back where the little ke’o grasshopper rubs its buttocks Pogo bipa latu wa’a ngia ta’a ana poi godo kidha, ma’e ghéwo gula latu wa’a logo ana poi ke’o ta’a ‘oco People and other things that prevent success in an undertaking Poi godo and poi ke’o are folk-taxonomic names for two kinds of grasshoppers. The phrases form part of songs performed during the rice harvest, where the grasshoppers serve as metaphors for all things that can cause rice seed to fall to the ground and thus reduce the size of the yield. 496. Grasshopper eggs Telo poi A decorated textile motif comprising a thin line Grasshopper eggs are laid in yellowish elliptical clusters forming strings of up to three centimetres in length, with one cluster I observed measuring one by 1.5 centimetres. The motif notionally resembles these strings (see Figure 29).

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

281

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 282

Figure 29 Grasshopper eggs motif (No. 496)

497. Cricket [and] tiny bat Cico méca Someone who (unreasonably) considers him- or herself superior to others Not widely known in central Nage, méca is a word for tiny bats in dialects to the northeast; the usual central Nage term is ‘ighu (see No. 248). The metaphor was first recorded as a reference to bothersome children, used by adults mostly as a way of venting annoyance. As applied to adults, however, it describes a person who puts himself before others, for instance a man who – to cite an example given by a female informant – pushes his way to the front of a crowd. According to the same source, crickets and tiny bats are metaphorically deployed in this context because they are very small creatures able to enter cracks and fit into narrow spaces. As explained elsewhere, tiny bats in fact nest inside bamboo internodes, which they enter through cracks (Forth 2016, 283–4).

282

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 283

MANTIS • Dictyoptera 498. Praying mantis on top of a cotton blossom Kaka koda tolo bhena An idle person who waits to be fed Nage describe mantises as sitting motionless while waiting for smaller insect prey to come to them. The metaphor is thus synonymous with “monitor lizard collecting ants” (No. 441).

WASPS • Hymenoptera, superfamily Vespoidea, Vespidae 499. Entering an in-law’s house like a wasp piercing vegetables Nuka sa’o tu’a bhia fua zeka uta A new wife who often returns to her parents This is the female version, as it were, of No. 502. After completion of bridewealth, Nage couples usually take up residence with the husband’s parents, if not in the same house then in the same village. The expression refers more specifically to a newly married woman who, unconventionally, frequently and without good reason returns to her parents’ residence. Nage wives may legitimately visit their parents but only when there is a definite reason for doing so (e.g., to attend a funeral or participate in some other ritual undertaking) and then only in the company of members of their husband’s family – that is, as wife-takers. Selection of the wasp in this metaphor is apparently motivated by the same considerations as apply in No. 502, and both represent inconstancy in conjugal relationships by reference to an insect flying from plant to plant. 500. Hornet striking Ngika tau A blow to the head with something hard; a sudden, very severe pain Ngika is a large hornet whose extremely painful bite Nage describe as possibly fatal. When the hornet strikes, it is said, the stinger makes a noise, like a piece of wood or similar object striking a body. The phrase is used especially with

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

283

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 284

reference to pugilistic competitions (etu), when a competitor delivers a blow to an opponent’s head with a kepo, a sort of cosh described in No. 408. Here, as in other contexts, tau, “to do, make,” has the sense of “to attack.” 501. Small wasp (and) fig sap Ta’i cu’a nana a A stingy, ungenerous person or someone who is unresponsive or unaccommodating Meaning “dirt from a digging stick,” ta’i cu’a is the name of a honey-producing insect resembling a very small wasp. (Although previously described as a wasp [Forth 2016, 331], the creature may in fact be a tiny bee.2) The insects are named for a dark, sticky substance found inside their nests, which clings to their bodies, like soft soil on a digging stick. As a complementary term “fig sap” (nana a) identically refers to a sticky substance that is very difficult to dislodge, thus the two terms together serve as an appropriate metaphor for things – be they material goods, information, or assistance – that an ungenerous person is reluctant to give away. 502. Wasp piercing vegetable blossoms Fua ta’a zeka wonga uta A man who goes from woman to woman The metaphor can refer specifically to a young man who, for a time, works for a woman’s parents with the apparent intention of marrying her, but who after a while becomes attracted to another woman. The motivation is a wasp flitting from plant to plant, thus reflecting the behaviour of an inconstant suitor. “Vegetable blossom” more specifically refers to the blossoms of pumpkins (hea, specifically the ash gourd Benincasa hispida), and, according to Nage, should a wasp pierce these (or, more particularly, what is apparently the female flower), then no fruit will develop and the plant will be ruined. Evidently described here is an insect behaviour known as “nectar robbing.” Practised by wasps, bees, other insects, and even some birds and mammals, this involves “stealing” nectar by perforating floral tissue rather than entering from the floral opening and thereby contributing to pollination – although possibly contrary to the Nage view, this is not always harmful to the plant

284

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 285

(Irwin et al. 2010). Why wasps in particular are employed as the vehicle for this metaphor is unclear, but, insofar as the same behaviour motivates No. 499, it is possible that prosody plays the decisive role in view of the assonance of fua (wasp) and uta, and in the earlier metaphor also the rhyme with tu’a (a wife’s parents or, prospectively, the parents of the abandoned woman in the present metaphor). 503. Yellow wasp whose sting hurts straightaway, narrow-waisted wasp whose bite is very painful Fua te’a ta’a kiki ‘o méma, fua ‘ége ngéke ta’a kiki ‘o ‘é’e People of the opposite sex who are capable of harming one another These are lyrics of a néke song performed by women and men in turns and warning members of the opposite sex that they risk harm, or can be “bitten” (kiki), if they become involved with the singers. “Yellow wasp” and “narrowwaisted wasp” are both folk-taxonomic names denoting different kinds of wasps, the latter being known in English as “thread-waisted wasps.” Most commentators understood “narrow-waisted wasp” as a specific reference to a woman, the similar anatomical feature in humans being considered a mark of female beauty, and accordingly “yellow wasp” as a reference to a man.

ANTS • Hymenoptera, superfamily Vespoidea, Formicidae 504. Ant that carries coconut dregs on its head Metu su’u pe’a A person who takes on a weighty task without positive results Nage possess no completely inclusive term for “ant.” Metu, however, denotes several kinds of small, red-coloured ants, each distinguished by a qualifier (e.g., metu lade), and it may be consistent with this that metu occurs in the majority of ant metaphors, though mule, designating a kind of black ant, comes a close second. A standard binary composite referring to ants in general is metu mule. In the present expression the worthlessness of coconut dregs (pe’a) – coconut flesh from which the milk has already been pressed – is crucial to the metaphor, as it is to No. 505.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

285

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 286

505. Ant that repeatedly carries off coconut dregs Metu pa’u pe’a A person who regularly causes trouble or who brings trouble to a community Apparently informing this metaphor is the fact that, when carrying off coconut dregs, ants will come back several times to a single spot to collect more. Otherwise, commentators provided a number of somewhat diverse interpretations. These included: a person who engages repeatedly in an act; someone who continually causes trouble; a person who does not fit in or get along with others; someone who brings other people’s problems “to places where these are not necessary or appropriate”; a person who moves from place to place; and someone who introduces outsiders to a community who then cause trouble. The last interpretation, which overlaps some of the others, seemed especially pertinent. 506. Ant that smells meat Metu mazo poza A person from whom it is difficult to keep anything hidden, and who eventually discovers what others are trying to conceal According to Nage, the metaphor has its basis in the ability of ants to find their way to food that is hidden away or out of sight. 507. Nose like an ant Bhia izu metu A person who simply appears at a gathering where meat is being consumed, typically a sacrificial ritual, without being invited; someone from whom it is difficult to hide anything As one commentator gave as an example a wife or children who always find tobacco or money a man has saved for himself, the metaphor is partly synonymous with the preceding (No. 506). Also, the entomological motivation is the same – ants attracted by food or the remains of human food. (Cf. Indonesian ada gula ada semut, “where there is sugar there are ants.”)

286

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 287

508. Red ants and black ants Metu mule A large number of people assembled in a single place As the two ant terms in combination convey the sense of ants in general, the resultant phrase, conveying so comprehensive a connotation, serves as an appropriate metaphor for a multitude of humans – or, as one might say, “all sorts of people.” 509. Black ants on top of a bamboo fence Mule tolo mada A couple who enter into a conjugal relationship without bridewealth or before marriage payments are complete The relationship to which this metaphor refers differs from illicit sex (which has its own, separate metaphors) since it concerns couples who themselves initiate a conjugal relationship, openly cohabit, and may bear several children before any bridewealth is paid. Typically, such unions are also accepted by both sets of parents and can be as durable as other marriages. Mada refers to a high bamboo fence constructed inside a village to provide an enclosure for special public events such as large-scale buffalo sacrificing (pa sése) and etu (annual pugilistic competitions). Mule are black ants typically encountered on tree trunks and branches, and, as Nage remark, wherever there is a mada these ants will be found crawling along the top. As was further explained, two ants coming from opposite directions and meeting in the middle of a fence top will, after sniffing one another, usually go off together in a single direction. 510. Numerous as black ants in the hills, as dense as fish fry in the estuary Woso bhia mule zéle wolo, kapa bhia ipu lau nanga A large number of offspring or descendants Nage employ these phrases in rites of offering to ancestors and other beneficent spiritual entities, requesting that humans and livestock be prolific and multiply. Comparable usages employing mammals and birds include Nos. 123 and 270. Although “hill, highland” is a more specific sense, wolo can more

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

287

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 288

generally mean “dry land” in contrast to bodies of water. Like other parallelistic metaphors employed in ritual address, therefore, creatures of the dry land are here contrasted with creatures of the river or sea. In this instance, of course, the two sorts of animals concerned are also ones that occur in extremely large numbers. 511. Tree ant’s backside ‘Obo mesa A person with large, protruding buttocks Usually expressed as “having buttocks like a mesa ant,” the phrase is most often applied to a woman. The ant named mesa, typically found in trees, is distinguished from other ants by a gaster (abdomen) that points upwards and is therefore especially noticeable.

BEES • Hymenoptera, superfamily Apoidea 512. Bees inside a cavity (nest) ‘Ua one hodo A person who mumbles or speaks incoherently; several people speaking simultaneously so that one cannot make out what they are saying When applied to several people, the metaphor obviously recalls the English expression “buzz of conversation.” ‘Ua apparently denotes the bee Apis indica or A. cerana indica. 513. Honey-bees have hung their nests, (other) bees have suspended their hives Ani ne dadi, eo ne tépo People who maintain long residence in a place or who possess much experience of something The metaphor is sometimes employed in self-reference (“I am/we are bees that have hung their nests …”). Ani are a kind of honey bee (Apis dorsata) that suspends nests from tree branches. By contrast, Nage describe ‘ua, another

288

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 289

kind of honey bee (see No. 512), as typically nesting in cavities in or near the ground, thus explaining why ani is the vehicle of the present metaphor. Rather than a separate species, eo, bees described as occupying part of the same nests, apparently refers to drones. Dadi and tépo, “to hang, suspend,” are synonyms, while “nests” and “hives” is a distinction required only for purposes of translation. The parallelistic expression refers to the fact that hives can be inhabited for a long time or rebuilt in the same place. Applied to humans, the metaphor usually conveys a positive assessment, alluding to rights acquired or affirmed through a group’s long occupation of a territory. According to another interpretation, it refers not so much to long occupation of a place but to people who have travelled far and gained much experience before finally settling down. Ne is an abbreviation of négha, “already,” a usual way of registering the past tense. 514. Orphan bee ‘Ua ta’a ana halo A person who lacks family or companions More specific interpretations included a person or small family that does not possess or associate with other kin, and a couple with few or no children who therefore have few people to turn to for assistance. The metaphor reflects the Nage observation that, while bees characteristically occur in swarms, occasionally one can encounter a single bee or a small number of bees – for example, when a few remain after the majority have abandoned a nest. I also recorded the expression as ani ana halo (see No. 513). 515. Other bees have suspended their hives, eo ne tépo. See Honey-bees have hung their nests (No. 513).

FLIES and MOSQUITOES • Diptera 516. Fly alighting on sores Hale celo teka A person who frequently changes what he or she is doing

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

289

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 290

Celo more exactly means “to alight successively in various places, flying hither and yon,” and here more specifically describes a fly moving from sore to sore among a herd of animals and not remaining long on any single sore. The human “fly” can be someone who similarly moves from place to place. But probably a more usual application is someone who frequently changes tasks, not finishing any one before moving on to another (as in the expression kema bhia na’a hale celo teka, “to work like a fly moving from sore to sore”). This, then, is one of a number of Nage metaphors that express disapproval of people who are inconstant in their efforts and will start a task before completing another. According to another interpretation, the metaphor can also refer to someone who keeps changing sides in a dispute. In as much as it depicts insects moving quickly from place to place, the Nage usage might recall English “blue-arsed fly” (apparently a bluebottle or blowfly, a kind Nage call hale mite, “black, dark fly”), which refers to a person who is excessively busy, hurrying from task to task. 517. Fly following a sore Hale dhéko teka A person who habitually follows another The metaphor is motivated by the habit of flies persistently following ulcerated sores on the bodies of livestock as the animals move about. Several specific interpretations were recorded: someone always quick to take advantage of a situation, thus an opportunist; a person who continually pursues another, perhaps seeking support or assistance, and who is difficult to get rid of; and a group of people, for example a gang of youngsters, who follow a person around, especially a stranger or visitor whom they find curious or interesting. Tule (1998, 94) lists a cognate expression in central Keo (ade dhéko neka) as a reference to “loyal followers,” but this meaning seems not to be recognized by Nage. 518. Flies swarming around a sore Hale mole teka A number of males drawn to an attractive woman

290

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 291

In this expression, hale is always understood in the plural (flies). The metaphor is virtually identical to English “bees around a honey pot” (see also No. 492). 519. Mosquitoes and flies Emu hale People who are “small” and socially insignificant, or children or other people who are bothersome From both the small size of these flying insects and the obvious ways in which they annoy humans, the motivation for this metaphor is straightforward, and in both respects the usage is comparable to “bedbugs [and] dog fleas” (see No. 536). In the first sense the metaphor can be expressed as an admonition, “do not follow people who are mosquitoes and flies” (ma’e dhéko ta’a ata ta’a emu hale), meaning “do not emulate, trust, or have faith in insignificant people, people of little account.” Dhéko, “to follow,” can also mean “to believe (in).” As a reference to insignificant humans, Nage “mosquitoes and flies” is synonymous with English “insect” in the sense of “an insignificant or contemptible person” (Oxford English Reference Dictionary).

BEETLES • Coleoptera 520. Dung beetle informs the earthquake Banga soke ebu A bringer of false news, especially a report that causes others to act unnecessarily or inappropriately A slightly different interpretation offered by one informant concerns someone who cannot keep a secret and will pass on whatever he or she hears, regardless of its veracity. The metaphor derives from a belief concerning earthquakes (ebu weo). Nage say tremours occur when a dung beetle (banga or banga ta’i) is unable to find dung (ta’i) and so incorrectly infers that humans have vanished from the earth. This the beetle communicates to Ebu – which can be understood as a reference either to the earthquake personified or, as Nage explain, to god (ga’e déwa). To test this, god (or the earthquake) then shakes the earth to see if he can get a response. Whenever earth tremours

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

291

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 292

occur, therefore, Nage pound on floors and walls of houses while crying out “we are still here” (kami manga) so that god will know that the beetle’s report was false and stop the shaking. As the term for “grandparent, ancestor,” ebu evidently derives from a different protoform than does ebu in the sense of “earthquake,” a cognate of Ngadha repu (Arndt 1961) and eastern Sumbanese upung (Onvlee 1984 s.v.). Affirming the sense of “earthquake,” the more complete form of the Nage term is ebu weo (weo, “to shake”). All these ideas further inform the lyrics of a song: “Earthquake shakes and shudders, dung beetle digs in the earth, oh we are here” (ebu weo kéko wéjo, ana banga kore tana, o kami dia ma manga). 521. Dung beetle’s antenna grass Ego tadu banga A kind of grass The plant is so named because its seeds bear some resemblance to the beetle’s “horns” (antennae). Ego names several kinds of grasses (cf. No. 540). 522. Fireflies Lépe kobe Many lights or fires seen at a distance in the night Modifying unanalyzable lépe, kobe is “night.” Usually expressed as “like fireflies,” the expression can refer, for example, to hunters’ overnight camps made during the annual collective hunt (to’a lako). 523. Neck like a banana beetle Tengu bhia ko’o muku te’a A person who is too compliant, who gives in too easily to a request Most likely a member of the Cerambycidae, “banana beetle” refers to a small yellow beetle with dark markings which Nage compare to a “ripe banana” (muku te’a). Apparently referring to the beetle also called fugu kune (kune is “yellow”; Forth 2016, 333), I first recorded the name muku te’a in 2017. Nage know the beetle especially for its habit of moving its head up and down as if nodding in agreement – a gesture that, among Nage as among Westerners, signifies assent, acknowledgment, or understanding. A traditional children’s

292

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 293

game involves a youngster holding onto a specimen and addressing the creature with the phrases: “Ripe banana (beetle), you give me a chicken, you give me a piglet (or a foal or buffalo calf)” (Muku te’a muku te’a, kau ti’i nga’o me’a ana manu, ti’i nga’o ana wawi [ana ja, ana bhada]). After each request the speaker waits until the insect nods its head as if in agreement, and she or he may then proceed with another request. Since there is no expectation that the request will be granted, this is not a magical rite. However, one elderly man mentioned how, as a child, he would feel strange when witnessing such a tiny creature nod its head as though human and understanding what was being said. For a large part, the metaphor is synonymous to a horse metaphor (No. 47). As a negative evaluation and accusation, it appears to be used most often between spouses. 524. Crown (top of the head) of a rhinoceros beetle Todo moco A bald head or a bald-headed man The beetle’s head and a bald man’s pate are both shiny. The expression seems mostly to be used as an insult, as in a diatribe delivered by a famous ancestor, where it complements “grasshopper’s thighs” (No. 494). 525. Rhinoceros beetle’s rump Bui moco The (human) fingertip This is the only term for this body part. The motivation is not just the beetle’s shape and size, corresponding to the tip of an adult human’s finger, but its brownish-red colour as well. The metaphor is not applied to non-humans, for example, to the fingertips of monkeys. 526. Spun like a rhinoceros beetle Leo moco Someone who is easily threatened or abused Leo moco is a children’s pastime in which a rhinoceros beetle is tied to a string and swung around in the air. When addressed to a person, “you will be like

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

293

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 294

a swinging beetle” (kau bhia leo moco) constitutes a threat to the effect that, if the addressee does not comply with the speaker’s demands, he or she will be subject to the same treatment as the beetle in the children’s game. 527. Weevil holes Lia suse Pits in the skin that develop in extremely old people Suse are small weevils of the family Curculionidae that characteristically bore into dried maize and other stored goods. Nage do not regard the holes that appear on an old person’s skin as actually having been made by weevils but only as resembling holes weevils bore, for example, into dried maize cobs. Evidently referring to some skin condition, Nage say the pits – also referred to simply as suse (“weevils”) – appear on the skin of only a minority of people who reach an unusually advanced age (Forth 2018a). This I have never witnessed myself – not surprisingly, as Nage also claim that local people no longer live to such advanced ages, although they did in the past.

TRUE BUGS • Hemiptera 528. Cicadas calling Naju ta’a ie The wailing or whining of small children This is one of numerous metaphors typically uttered by parents in exasperation, when criticizing or reprimanding children or simply complaining about their crying. The call of cicadas comprises a continuous shrill, high-pitched, and rather penetrating sound produced by large numbers of the insects simultaneously rubbing their limbs together. 529. Meci pepper Ko meci A sort of pepper The colour of this small, round pepper is greenish, like the insect called meci, described as resembling a small cicada.

294

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 295

530. Stinkbug whose head has been squeezed Hengo ta’a pese ulu A person who behaves forcefully or aggressively but quickly becomes subdued when a superior arrives. Explaining the metaphor, commentators remarked how stinkbugs quickly die when their heads are squeezed between the thumb and forefinger, the usual way of killing them. Hengo denotes members of the Coreidae, of which Nage distinguish two kinds. Referring to the Green padi bug Leptocorisa acuta, one of these is named hengo ‘é’e (“bad hengo”). Since this is the kind that does damage to rice and because its smell is deemed more unpleasant than the other, larger sort of stinkbug, the vehicle of this metaphor is more likely to be the padi bug.

OTHER INSECTS 531. Chicken lice Kutu manu A bothersome person or mischievous, misbehaving children who will not heed warnings Infesting domestic fowls, these lice, though they do not bite humans, can infest people’s bodies and clothing and cause considerable irritation. One occurrence of the metaphor is in the lyrics of sort of a victory chant performed by men of ‘Abu village, led by members of the clan Tegu (“Thunder”). During the annual ritual hunt, they will exclaim: “‘Abu men are chicken lice, one can scratch but the discomfort remains” (‘Abu kutu manu, sasi pau ogi esi latu). This means that, however one responds to the actions of ‘Abu people, their effects will endure. The usage is one of relatively few instances in which animal metaphors are employed self-referentially. 532. Cockroach on the edge of a plate Ngozo wiwi kula A person who remains silent when others speak and does not participate in a discussion

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

295

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 296

Wiwi, “lip,” here refers to the edge of a gourd-shell vessel (kula; see figure 30). Traditionally used as plates during collective, ritual meals, the inside surfaces of the vessels are blackened with soot, which acts as a preservative. Not always deterred by the soot, however, cockroaches will consume the relatively soft interiors of the vessels, especially when these are stored in dark, smoky places above hearths. The image of a cockroach silently bobbing its head seems also to contribute to the metaphor. While ngozo refers to one of two kinds of cockroaches recognized by Nage, it is nevertheless the other kind (named pegi) that is more usually found inside houses and is therefore more likely to infest gourd vessels. The specification of ngozo in the present metaphor is therefore curious, and commentators could only suggest that ngozo may be used because it “sounds better” (Forth 2015, 391–2). However, further insight may be gained from comparison with neighbouring languages. For “cockroach” in Ngadha, Arndt (1961) thus lists only ngozo, at the same time recording three compounds of the same word that make no reference to the insect. These are ngozo ngica (ngica = Nage ngia, “face”), “to stick the head out (or forward) in order to hear, see, ask a question, and so on”; papa ngozo, “to approach one another closely, come face to face”; and ngozo dho, “engrossed, absorbed in oneself ” or “rapt (in thought),” and to “sit in silence.” Especially this last sense recalls the behaviour of persons Nage compare to a “cockroach on the edge of a dish,” and it is therefore possible that the Ngadha usages either express senses of ngozo that have been lost in Nage or reflect metaphorical uses of “cockroach” (ngozo) that are not articulated in Arndt’s glosses. It is also possible that the Nage metaphor has been adopted from Ngadha. 533. Cockroach slamming into a spider’s web Pegi ni’o kaka meo A person performing a task in a laboured, awkward, or unsteady and therefore inefficient way The expression is typically employed in derisive criticism of someone making a bad job of something. Usually denoting a spider, kaka meo in this context has the alternate sense of “spider’s web.” While ni’o generally means “to slam, ram into,” it especially refers to male thrusting during sexual intercourse. It seems to retain this connotation here, although the animal behaviour depicted is in fact a cockroach that has slammed into a web and tries to extricate

296

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 297

Figure 30 Gourd-shell vessels (No. 532)

itself (thus quickly moving backwards and forwards). One recorded application was to an old and incompetent man slowly and awkwardly climbing a palm tree. Earlier reported local interpretations of the metaphor, including two people colliding and a lower-ranking man involved in a sexual relationship with a higher-ranking woman (Forth 2015, 391), now appear to be, if not inaccurate, then too specific and so insufficiently representative. 534. Small cockroach Hipa ngapi A worthless, insignificant person Described by one man as referring to someone without ideas or cares, the metaphor is often expressed as “having a mind like a hipa ngapi” (ngai zede bhia hipa ngapi). Translated here as “mind,” the concept of ngai zede was discussed earlier with reference to a dog and pig metaphor (No. 86). Whether hipa ngapi refers to an animal of any particular sort is controversial. Some Nage interpret hipa as a name for the Oriental cockroach Blatta orientalis

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

297

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 298

(Forth 2016, 336). Although most people are not familiar with this meaning, it is nonetheless interesting that the other component, ngapi, occurs as part of an invertebrate name in some dialects of Lio (Arndt 1933) – ngapi te’e, “centipede.” In both Nage and Ngadha, ngapi can mean “cliff, cliff face,” “rocky ledge.” But many people understand hipa ngapi as no more than a vague reference to a small, unknown, and insignificant creature of no specific kind. Some commentators said the metaphor refers especially to small children, particularly in regard to their lack of knowledge and understanding (and particularly in situations in which this is found annoying), but others disagreed. 535. Termite Ghane Someone who appears honourable but has unseen negative qualities Ghane denotes a kind of termite Nage describe as infesting only the lower portion of wooden house posts set in the ground, where the insect’s destructive activity goes unnoticed. By contrast, termites that infest parts of house posts or other wooden components located above ground are called ngana, a term not used as a metaphor. Since infestations of ngana are deemed “inauspicious” (pie, a term also meaning “taboo”; Forth 2016, 243), however, these insects are the subject of another sort of symbolic representation. 536. Bedbugs and dog fleas (1) Maju mela People, especially young children, whose behaviour is found irritating and annoying The names of the two insects, both of which regularly occur in Nage houses, are combined to form a standard binary composite. As applied to children, the metaphor is synonymous with “mosquitoes and flies” (No. 519), and in both cases the reference to bothersome humans is reminiscent of English “bug” in the sense of “to bother, annoy, or irritate someone” (Palmatier 1995, 44). In a cleansing ceremony, maju mela refers synecdochically to all undesirable qualities that are ritually removed from a house.

298

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 299

537. Bedbugs and dog fleas (2) Maju mela The smallest or least significant of things associated with a particular place Semantically quite distinct from No. 536, this usage is listed as a separate metaphor. Should all residents of a house leave together, for example to undertake a long journey, people might sarcastically remark: “You’re all going, leaving nothing behind, having even beaten the walls and floors to remove the bedbugs and dog fleas” (Miu la’a zebu mona ési, ‘imo maju mela dhega begha). A comparable English expression is “taking everything but the kitchen sink,” a similarly sarcastic assessment describing, for example, someone who packs a great deal of luggage for a trip. In the Nage usage, however, the house becomes emptied not just of material possessions but of all living occupants. 538. Crawling bedbug Maju laka A person who moves very slowly The metaphor expresses disapproval of someone who moves or does something too slowly. 539. Bedbug mango Pau maju A variety of mango The tree is so named because its fruit has an unpleasant odour reminiscent of the smell of bedbugs. The fruit is nevertheless eaten. 540. Dog flea grass Ego mela A kind of grass or weed Although Nage confirmed that mela here refers to the flea, the motivation remains unclear. A plant that Ngadha call mata mela (mata is “eye,” “source”) has been identified as Oxalis corniculata (Verheijen 1990, 31), Creeping woodsorrel.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

299

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 300

INSECT LARVAE 541. Arse like a maggot (or worm) Bhia ‘obo ne’e ule A person who cannot keep still Besides “maggot,” ule covers a variety of insect larva, most of which wriggle and squirm. The sense is similar to English “ants in one’s pants.” 542. Bamboo on one side of the village, its stem appears fine, but a grub is boring inside Bheto zale ghoe, alu podi modhe, bholo ta’a ule kore one Something or someone that appears good from the outside but is essentially bad The phrases occur in the lyrics of a song. Although generally applied to insect larvae, here ule is more specifically interpreted as referring to a grub that infests a kind of giant bamboo (bheto). As a direction term, zale, which in central Nage refers to the direction to one’s left as one faces towards the “head” (upper end) of a village or towards the peak of the Ebu Lobo volcano, appears quite arbitrary. On the other hand, it seems relevant that, when combined with one (“inside”) to form zale one, the two terms in combination mean “inside” (as in zale one sa’o, “inside the house”). In regard to its referent, the entire expression is synonymous with “termite” (No. 535). 543. Grub sniffing its own arse Doko sengu ‘obo A quiet, inactive person who rarely leaves the house Doko names a large grub growing to a length of several centimetres and described as the larval stage of cicadas and beetles. When immobile, the grub curls up with its head in close proximity to its tail, straightening out in order to move. The phrase can also apply to the sleeping position of a human similarly disposed, that is, someone assuming a foetal position.

300

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 301

544. Grub that eats rice plants from the roots up Doko ta’a gho pae A person who does harm that is not initially detected Gho, here translated as “to eat,” more specifically means “to pull, haul, drag.” As Nage note, doko grubs nest in the earth of cultivated fields, where they will consume rice stems by feeding on the roots. As regards its human referent, therefore, the metaphor appears similar to Nos. 535 and 542. However, according to one commentator, it especially applies to shiftless children who do not work but simply live off their parents, an interpretation that apparently identifies a family (parents and children) with a house – that is, an interior place that, in this case, is gradually being damaged by an undesirable internal relationship (cf. No. 13). In regard to grubs nesting in, or under, the earth, it should be noted that zale (or zale one) means both “under, beneath” and “inside.” 545. Mosquito larva Méto A person who is restless and cannot keep still, a fidget Mosquito larvae, in English also known as “wrigglers,” constantly move and squirm in water, thus providing an appropriate metaphor for someone who fidgets, moving about compulsively and unnecessarily, and who cannot keep still (in one instance recorded as “you sit like a mosquito larva,” kau podhu bhia ko’o méto kau). A variant expression is “having an arse like a mosquito larva” (sama ‘obo ne’e méto), a synonym of “having an arse like a maggot” (No. 541). 546. Small caterpillars Ngota Livestock that do damage to cultivated fields The caterpillars occur in large irruptions every several years, and the damage they then do to crops identifies them metaphorically with larger animals that do the same. Ancestral legends commonly ascribe the movement of human groups to swarms of ngota invading houses and thus rendering settlements uninhabitable (Forth 2016, 240–1).

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

301

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 302

ARACHNIDS As a class distinct from insects, arachnids include spiders, scorpions, ticks, and mites. For present purposes, the distinction is hardly significant, yet it is noteworthy that, of the foregoing, only scorpions and mites are employed as metaphors, and I was unable to find any expressions employing spiders. 547. Rat mites Tumu dhéke Bothersome children Also called ma dhéke, the mites, too small to be seen, deliver painful, vexatious bites that Nage compare to the annoyance caused by obstreperous children who plague adults with noisy and unruly behaviour. The usage is thus one of a number of Nage metaphors with the same reference. 548. Scorpion down in the lowlands bites and causes pain but (the wound) does not bleed, Éko teko zi mala kiki ‘o mona ‘a. See Leech up in the hills bites and draws blood but (the wound) does not hurt (No. 563)

CRUSTACEANS Like insects and arachnids, crustaceans are arthropods. Among these, Nage make noticeable metaphoric use of crayfish (freshwater prawns) and crabs. “Crayfish” also forms one half of a standard composite denoting all freshwater foods, kuza tuna (“crayfish [and] eels”). 549. Arms like the claws of a crayfish Lima bhia anga kuza Someone who, at a collective meal or feast, helps himself to a lot of food; a greedy or voracious person Unmodified kuza names a Giant river prawn Macrobrachium sp., the largest sort of freshwater crustacean known to Nage. Nage nomenclature further distinguishes three growth stages of the prawn: ngoi (see No. 552), faja, and

302

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 303

lado ngao (No. 553). Related to kanga (human fingers and toes and the digits of certain vertebrate animals), anga refers exclusively to the claws, or pincers, of crustaceans and scorpions. Especially since the claws of a crayfish are large in proportion to their overall size, the metaphor is somewhat reminiscent of the English expression “having long fingers” (or being “long-fingered”) – a usage that corresponds exactly to Nage kanga léwa and refers to a thief. However, “having arms like crayfish claws” does not refer to a thief, or at least is not usually employed in this way. A plant metaphor for a thief is koba paga, “vines of the bitter gourd Momordica charantia,” which similarly are long and rambling. 550. Crayfish have bellies, Kuza ne’e tuka. See Frogs have livers (No. 481) 551. Crayfish at Au Galu retreats a long way Kuza Au Galu medhi léwa latu A person who retreats in order to avoid harm The expression is a lyric in a planting song. Au Galu is a waterside location in central Nage. The metaphor can more specifically describe a competitor in the pugilistic competition called etu, who moves backwards in order to avoid a blow. Otherwise, it refers to anyone who is sensibly cautious. The metaphor reflects the Nage observation that crustaceans often move backwards rather than forwards. Palmatier (1995, 99) records American English “crawfish” (a dialectal variant of “crayfish”), which he defines as “to retreat from a position” and explains as reflecting “the fact that all lobsterlike crustaceans, including the crawfish, have the capability of moving rapidly backward by forcing their large, flexible tail downward, again and again, until they have retreated from danger.” 552. Each pool has its own crayfish Ne’e tiwu ne’e ngoi ngata Every region or settlement has its own distinctive character Ngoi denotes a river prawn (Macrobrachium sp.) at an early stage of growth, but selection of the term may largely be determined by the alliterative effect of ngoi and ngata.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

303

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 304

553. Large crayfish Lado ngao A woman who is bold and aggressive; a person who is forceful and unwilling to accept defeat This expression was first explained as referring to “a woman who acts like a man,” or a woman who is confrontational and will not be subordinated (particularly to men), and there is a common view that the metaphor applies either exclusively or especially to females. In fact, Nage apply it to both men and women. Denoting the mature form of the Giant river prawn, lado ngao means “blue-green antennae” and describes a physical feature of the prawns. The only motivation commentators could suggest for the metaphor concerned the larger size of these prawns and their ability to dominate smaller prawns. Yet possibly also relevant is the further use of lado to denote ceremonial headdresses worn by high-ranking men. Women to whom the metaphor is applied can include females who do not demur at engaging in sex with other women’s husbands, but this apparently does not reflect Nage ideas about the behaviour of large crustaceans. 554. Small freshwater prawn Kuza kela A person who is bent over or hunchbacked This is the folk taxonomic name of a smaller kind of freshwater prawn (kuza), distinct from the Giant prawn Macrobrachium sp. Kela is “cane grass.” As the usual expression is “having a back like a kuza kela” (logo bhia kuza kela), alluding to the crustacean’s curved back, the motivation appears straightforward. However, one man interpreted the metaphor as referring instead to a dirty person, with regard to dark stripes or marks on the prawn’s back. 555. Crayfish (or prawn) plant Uta kuza A kind of wild plant Uta denotes a large class of leafy vegetables, both domestic and wild, and can contextually refer to vegetable food in general. Nage explained the name with reference both to the plant growing in watery places and a practice of cooking the leaves with freshwater prawns. 304

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 305

556. Crab in the river Doga advances in pretence Moga lowo Doga je podi we’e A person who pretends to be friendly Following “crayfish at Au Galu” (No. 551), this expression occurs in a planting song. Lowo Doga is a stream close to the main central Nage village of Bo’a Wae, but its selection is obviously motivated by the rhyme with moga (freshwater crab). The occurrence of je podi we’e, otherwise interpreted as a bird metaphor (No. 390), is noteworthy since, in this phrase, je is not the name of a bird but a verb meaning “to advance slowly” and describes the sideways motion characteristic of crabs. The human referent thus recalls the English idiom “to sidle up” (meaning “to ingratiate oneself ”). The identification of the crab as a false friend is further revealed in No. 557. 557. Crab companion Moko moga An apparent friend who nevertheless does a person harm The treacherous friend may prove harmful, for example, by regularly teasing or annoying a person or not telling the truth. Nage explain the metaphor with reference to the pinching habit of crabs, but prosody evidently plays a part as well, as is clear from the resemblance of moga and moko (“friend, companion, comrade”). A less common variant of the metaphor is moko kojo, where kojo designates saltwater crabs, an expression that is analyzable in much the same way. In Indonesian, “rock crab” (kepiting batu) is a metaphor for a stingy, tight-fisted person, but in Nage miserliness is expressed with other animal metaphors (see, e.g., No. 501). 558. Monkey and crab. See ‘o’a ne’e moga (No. 220) 559. Crab’s pincers Ngi’i kojo A gangway of stones and earth that connects lower with higher flat level areas (teda) within a village Kojo denotes a marine crab. The structures are so named because they are seen to resemble a crab’s pincers (ngi’i, otherwise the word for “tooth, teeth”). I first recorded the usage in the Keo region, on Flores’s south central coast, I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

305

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 306

but later discovered it is also used in central Nage. The structures are alternatively called kota, but as this applies to stone walls in general, “crab’s pincers” is a more specific term. 560. Large fry trick (or mislead) small fry Podhe ‘ole ipu A more powerful person who, through deceit, makes use of people less powerful The metaphor applies particularly where the party misled consequently suffers misfortune not suffered by the one who misleads. In related Florenese languages podhe denotes freshwater crab larvae, but Nage know it only as the name of an unfamiliar sea creature somewhat larger than ipu, the fry of freshwater fish (see Nos. 469–71). They also know that podhe ascend from the sea and enter rivers shortly before the fish fry, but, although they always go first, Nage say, podhe invariably manage to elude capture, unlike the smaller fry that people catch in large numbers. Hence this provides another case in which people are mostly unfamiliar with an animal that provides the vehicle of a metaphor and yet know just enough about its behaviour to construct an interpretation. Expressed as podhe ndore ipu, virtually the same metaphor is found in south coastal regions of Lio, where ndore means “to lead, take the lead” and podhe are recognized as the immature form of freshwater crabs named mongga or mbongga (cf. Nage moga).

EARTHWORMS, CENTIPEDES, and LEECHES 561. Earthworm able to emerge from the earth but unable to re-enter Ta’i hati gedho be’o kono kéwo A person who enters a situation from which he or she is subsequently unable to extricate him- or herself Here translated as “to be able,” be’o more generally means “to know,” while kéwo, “to be unable,” can also mean “no longer to know something” or “to be unable to recall” (in contrast to ghéwo, “to forget”). The expression usually refers to someone who incurs a debt but is later unable to repay or who com-

306

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 307

mits to an undertaking but cannot see it through and, thus, is largely synonymous with a rat metaphor (No. 189). As explained elsewhere, the metaphor reflects the Nage conviction that earthworms, once they have emerged from the soil, can never re-enter and so always die on the surface (Forth 2016, 259– 60). According to a slightly different version, earthworms may be able to re-enter the ground but only at a different spot and then one never sees them do so. But this is likely a rationalization of the more categorical idea, and it is this that finds expression in a magical practice whereby, in order to disable a witch, one should grind up a desiccated worm and surreptitiously place it in the suspected witch’s drink (nowadays, hot coffee is the beverage of choice). In this way, after the malevolent spirit (wa) of the witch leaves the witch’s body to cause harm, it will no longer be able to re-enter, and the witch will be powerless. To ensure its efficacy, the magical actor recites the above metaphor, proclaiming that the malevolent spirit supposedly possessed by the victim will become like the earthworm. An alternative, apparently less common, and perhaps more recent use of the metaphor is as an admonition addressed to people, especially adolescents, who leave the house and do not return when they should, staying out until well after sunset. In addition to a metaphor, Nage employ the notion of earthworms unable to return to the earth as a riddle: “(It is) able to go out but unable to go in, what is it?” The answer, of course, is an earthworm. 562. Earthworm struck by the sun Ta’i hati ta’a gena leza A person who is no longer capable, who has lost a former ability or enthusiasm for some activity As Nage remark, earthworms shrivel and die from exposure to the sun, an observation likely connected with the notion expressed in the preceding metaphor (No. 561). One man interpreted the expression as describing someone suffering from heat exhaustion, but this seems not to be the main reference. 563. Leech up in the hills bites and draws blood but (the wound) does not hurt, scorpion down in the lowlands bites and causes pain but (the wound) does not bleed Mate ze kéli kiki ‘a mona ‘o, éko teko zi mala kiki ‘o mona ‘a

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

307

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 308

Some people cause harm that cannot be felt while others cause pain but leave no visible injury As Nage pointed out, the unseen character of injury caused by a leech is compounded by the fact that bleeding occurs only after the creature has fallen off or been removed from the skin. According to a more specific interpretation, the phrases contrast a person who harms another using words alone (the leech’s method) – either in direct confrontation or by slander – with a person who attacks someone physically. Combining two parallel phrases, the expression occurs in songs accompanying circle-dancing but also functions as a proverb and – with the subjects (leech and scorpion) removed – as a riddle (“it hurts but does not bleed, it bleeds but does not hurt”). In song, the phrases describing the contrasting creatures are often rendered as ro iwa ra and ra iwa ro. As iwa is the negative in Lio and the Ja’o dialect of Endenese (cf. Nage mona), where “blood” is ra (central Nage ‘a) and “to be painful” (Nage ‘o) is ro, the expression has apparently been adopted from the east. 564. Legs and arms of a centipede Taga lima héte te’e An unusually large number of people The metaphor especially applies when many people assemble to carry out a task, so the work is completed quickly. As Nage normally describe centipedes as possessing only legs (taga), “legs and arms” apparently refers more to the human referents than to the chilipod.

GASTROPODS 565. Eyeballs like a snail Li’e mata bhia ko’o boko lo A person with large, round, and protruding eyes Having the same human referent as gecko and frog metaphors (Nos. 452, 476), the phrase alludes to the tentacles or “eye stalks” of land snails, at the ends of which the eyes are located. Relevant comparisons are English “bug-eyed” (where “bug” apparently has the colloquial American sense of a small crawling

308

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 309

or creeping animal) and “bug out,” both identically referring to people with bulging eyes. 566. Moving like a slug La’a bhia ko’o lema la Someone who walks very slowly Also recorded as la’a lema la na’a (where na’a expresses resemblance), lema la, the sole Nage term for slugs, literally means “protruding tongue” and so is itself obviously metaphorical. The longer expression is synonymous with English “sluggish” and “moving at a snail’s pace.” Summary Remarks Invertebrate categories used as metaphors reveal a preference for monomial taxa (categories named with single lexemes, or “words”) similar to what was found for vertebrate animals. Of the forty-six named invertebrates incorporated in Nage metaphors, just 28 percent (or thirteen) are binomials (e.g., kaka koda, praying mantis) whereas of the grand total of 113 the proportion of binomially named folk-generics is over 43 percent (forty-nine). In this respect invertebrates most closely compare with reptiles, fish, and amphibians (chapter 6) for which the corresponding figures are just over thirty and nearly 53 percent. (By contrast, the figures for birds are forty and 47 percent.) Among invertebrates, creatures employed most as metaphors are crustaceans, specifically crayfish (or prawns) and crabs. There are twelve crustacean metaphors divided among four named categories (kuza, moga, kojo, podhe). The next largest groups are ants and beetles (eight each), insect larvae (six), grasshoppers (five, or six including the cricket), and wasps (five). As the largest invertebrates known to Nage, the prominence of crustaceans is mostly attributable to their size and hence the relative ease with which their features and habits are observed. Nage also use crustaceans as food, but they consume many insects and insect larvae as well, so size may account for the greater incidence of crustacean metaphors more than does utilitarian value. The extent to which practical uses figure in the motivation of metaphors is discussed in the next chapter, with reference to animals of all kinds.

I N S E C T S A N D O T H E R I N V E R T E B R AT E S

309

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 310

8 The Differential Metaphorical Value of Different Animals

To paraphrase George Orwell, while all animals can serve as metaphors some are more metaphorical than others. As is clear from the previous five chapters, mammals predominate, occurring in over 42 percent (240) of the total 566 metaphors, followed by birds at over 31 percent (178), other vertebrates at just under 13 percent (73), and invertebrates at just over 13 percent (75). Comparable differences appear in the number of categories subsumed within each of the life forms that could in principle be used as metaphors in relation to how many are in fact so used. Counting all named categories – including folk-specifics (like ngo ngoe, a kind of wild cat; and “chicken monitor,” denoting a putative kind of monitor lizard) and life forms (“snake” and “fish”) as well as folk-generics (like “buffalo,” “porcupine,” “chicken,” “friarbird,” “python,” “pit viper,” “frog,” “grasshopper,” “bedbug,” and so on) – there are 318 animal categories that Nage could conceivably employ in conventional metaphors. However, the number actually employed is 140, or around 44 percent. The disparity is largely accounted for by invertebrates. Thus, while there are 177 invertebrate categories, and while these make up over half of the 318 animal categories, just 51, or less than a third of the total of 177, are used metaphorically. By contrast, the proportions for other kinds of animals are considerably higher. Of a total of 25 mammal categories, 68 percent (17 of 25) are used as metaphors.1 For birds the figure is also 68 percent (49 of 72), and for all other vertebrate animals 52 percent (23 of 44). The fact that, by this measure, birds should be metaphorically exploited to the same extent as mammals is not so remarkable when it is recalled that birds comprise a much larger number of named categories overall than do mammals (72 versus 25).

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 311

At the same time, individual mammal categories (e.g., “buffalo,” “dog,” “porcupine”) occur in a far larger number of individual metaphorical expressions than do categories of birds, many kinds of which figure as the vehicle of just one or two metaphors. In regard to the metaphorical value of different animals, therefore, one still sees progressive reduction as one, so to speak, moves down the evolutionary scale. Before discussing factors accounting for this difference, it is worth considering how such variation in Nage metaphor compares to what is found among anglophones. For this purpose, I use Palmatier’s dictionary of animal metaphors, in which he records 1,435 English usages that expressly include the name of an animal (e.g., “busy as a bee” but not “hive of activity”). Of these, 56 percent (807) denote mammals, both wild and domestic. Birds (under which I include bats, for the sake of comparison with Nage and also in accordance with an older English usage) then account for 22 percent (321); other vertebrate animals 9 percent (133); and invertebrates 12 percent (174). Obvious differences include the higher proportion of mammals among the English metaphors (56 rather than 42 percent), the lower proportion of birds (22 as opposed to 31 percent), and the lower figure for vertebrates other than birds or mammals (9 rather than 13 percent). On the other hand, it is noteworthy that mammals and birds added together amount to over 73 percent for Nage and 78 percent for English. Of course, the comparison might be questioned on several grounds, including the fact that the considerably larger English corpus draws partly on literary sources (including Shakespeare and the Bible) spanning different historical periods. In addition, Palmatier’s focus is American English and a number of British animal metaphors are absent (see 366n3). Nevertheless, the resemblance between English and Nage metaphors is quite remarkable. In the same connection it is also noteworthy how a recent study of animal categories applied metaphorically to human personality traits and employed by American university students similarly revealed mammals to outnumber birds, fish, and insects (Sommer and Sommer 2011). Why Mammals? In view of this predominance of mammals, several factors affecting the metaphorical value of different kinds of animals might suggest themselves. For the most part, these concern relations between animals and humans – and, more particularly, Nage humans.

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

311

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 312

As hinted above, the decreasing value as one moves from mammals to invertebrates points to a phylogenetic correspondence. This would suggest that animals most employed as conventional metaphors are those most morphologically and behaviourally similar to humans – in respect to locomotion; methods of mating, reproduction, suckling of young, and care of infants; body covering; normal habitat (land versus water or air); and perhaps even facial appearance or expression and non-linguistic vocalization. By these criteria, mammals are obviously more like humans (who of course are themselves mammals) than are non-mammals. But physical similarity cannot be the whole story, not least because the animal serving as the vehicle of most Nage metaphors, forty-four in all, is the chicken, and, as this indicates, familiarity and the closely linked factor of spatial proximity may be more important determinants of an animal’s metaphorical value than is phylogenetic relatedness. Indeed, half of the Nage mammal categories comprise domestic animals, thus creatures that, like chickens, occupy much the same spaces as humans or are otherwise regularly in contact with people. The importance of familiarity was mentioned with reference to wild birds in chapter 5, where it was shown that the absence of a number of kinds from the Nage corpus is largely explained by their comparative rarity. The point gains further support from a comparison of domestic and wild mammals. Despite the two groups incorporating a roughly equal number of named categories, wild mammals account for less than a third (78) of the total 240 mammal metaphors. Monkeys and murids (or rats and mice, dhéke) provide by far the largest number of wild mammal metaphors – 32 and 17, respectively. Yet the remaining 5 categories – deer (occurring in 8 expressions), porcupine (in 5), Giant rat (4), shrew (4), and civet (8) – account for a total of just 29 metaphors, and this is far fewer than the number of expressions employing the 5 “most metaphorical” birds – the chicken (occurring in 44 metaphors), friarbird (17), bat (10), quail (8), and Spotted dove (8). Also worth recalling are the 11 expressions incorporating “snake” (nipa), the 9 employing the Tokay gecko, and the 7 incorporating the monitor lizard. Among mammals, the large number of metaphors incorporating the monkey is hardly surprising in view of the familiarity of this animal (see chapter 4) and its close resemblance to humans. Nor is the frequency with which rats and mice are employed as metaphors. Nage encounter commensal rodents with great regularity, inside settlements and especially inside dwellings, as well as in or near granaries and cultivated fields. In fact, so familiar are mice

312

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 313

and rats that to call them “wild animals” seems almost counterintuitive. Rats and mice are instructive in another respect since, in regard to metaphorical prominence, their spatial proximity and familiarity arguably compensate for their small size. Hunn (1999) has discussed the role of physical size in an animal’s overall salience and hence its prominence in folk-taxonomy, and, the exception of mice and rats aside, the Nage evidence reveals a similar correspondence between greater size and prominence in metaphor. At the same time, the size of an animal closely coincides with its status as a mammal or non-mammal and a domestic or wild creature. Thus, with few exceptions, the largest animals known to Nage are domestic mammals, the majority of which are larger than wild mammals and also larger than birds and other non-mammalian vertebrates. (The only exceptions are pythons and currently extraterritorial crocodiles and, in comparison to house cats – the smallest domestic animals – perhaps herons and eagles.) Of course, these several criteria cannot account for all differences in metaphorical use among single animal categories. For example, why bat metaphors are relatively numerous remains a question, especially since bats are nocturnal, are therefore seen less often than many diurnal animals, and hold little value for Nage, utilitarian or otherwise. On the other hand, flying foxes, the largest of bats and the kind providing the most bat metaphors, can be quite large – about the size of Nage cats – with a wingspan of well over a metre. A similar question concerns the relatively small number of deer metaphors – eight in all and thus fewer than bat metaphors and far fewer than the seventeen metaphors incorporating the friarbird – especially given the size of deer, their relative familiarity, and their status as a prized game animal (Forth 2016, 105–10). At the same time, neither the use value of an animal nor its spiritual, ritual, or mythical significance play as much a part in its employment in conventional metaphors as might be expected – a matter I explore further below. Thus far I have not distinguished between animal metaphors referring to humans and metaphorical usages with other referents. So it should be noted that the prominence of mammals in Nage metaphors generally is replicated in the occurrence of names for mammals in metaphorical names for plants, other animals, spiritual beings, artefacts, natural phenomena, and parts of the day or annual cycle. Of these metaphorical names, 56 incorporate names for mammals (47 domestic and 9 wild); 43 include names for birds; and 7 employ names for other vertebrate animals (lizards, frogs, the crocodile, and

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

313

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 314

marine turtles). Invertebrate names occur in just four metaphorical names, all of these designating plants. With the exception of “snake” (nipa), all of the incorporated terms label folk-generics. Among mammals, “water buffalo” appears in by far the highest number of metaphorical names (18 of 56), while the next highest, “dog” and “pig,” each occur in 9. Among the 9 wild mammals, “rat, mouse” (dhéke) occurs in 4. Among the 43 metaphorical names incorporating terms for birds, “chicken” appears in 14 and “friarbird” in 4. In all, 17 bird categories are used in naming plants, animals, and other nonhuman entities, but most of these occur in just 1, 2, or 3 names. Discussing English animal names metaphorically incorporating terms for other animals (e.g., “mule deer,” “zebra finch”), Palmatier (1995, x) states that the number of metaphorical names is “much larger” among fish (e.g., “catfish,” “dog fish,” “tiger shark,” “sea raven,” and many others) than among other animals. Nage presents a different picture. Apart from the fact that more metaphorical names apply to plants than to animals (55 versus 24), of the 24 metaphorically named animals exactly one half (12) are invertebrates. Only two are fish (Nos. 386, 458). Another 3 are mammals (324, 325, 483), while birds and reptiles (snakes and lizards) are the referents of 4 each (110, 312, 380, 389, and 288, 289, 387, 431). Other patterns are discernible among these metaphorical names. To begin with, animal names included in names of other animals usually denote different life forms. The only exceptions are three birds (including a bat) named after other birds (Nos. 312, 380, 389) and the mock viper (431) named with reference to a real viper. As this should suggest, taxonomic relations play hardly any role in motivating such metaphors. Bird names are more prominent as components of names of other animals than are names of creatures belonging to any other life form. “Eagle” (kua) occurs in two mammal names (Nos. 324 and 325) that, together with a variety of pig named after a frog (pake, No. 483), are the only instances of mammals named after other animals. In other instances, animals are metaphorically named after animals that are larger than themselves, and often considerably larger. This is borne out not only by the numerous invertebrates named in this way but also by the greater occurrence of mammal names, ten in all, as components of the twelve invertebrate names. (The other two are names of birds.) In all instances in which quite different creatures are named after mammals, moreover, the latter are domestic mammals and never a wild animal. “Buffalo” thus occurs in the names of three invertebrates (e.g., cico bhada, designating

314

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 315

a kind of cricket, No. 21), “pig” in four, “cat” in two, and “dog” in one. Except for “mock viper” (No. 431), “gecko goby” (458), and “frog pig” (483), names of lizards, snakes, fish, and amphibians do not occur in metaphorical animal names, and with just one exception none designates a mammal or a bird. Mammal names are also more numerous in metaphorical names applied to plants. Among kinds of plants metaphorically named after animals, twenty-nine are designated with names of mammals, both domestic and wild (e.g., “monkey’s testicles,” denoting a kind of tree), while twenty-five incorporate non-mammals. Among the latter, birds are the vehicles for fifteen names, reptiles for six, and invertebrates for four. Including several currently wild kinds (deer, porcupines, monkeys) all mammals except for bats and several murid species were brought to Flores by humans, as were chickens and domestic ducks. However, other than the two metaphors employing cattle and the two employing ducks, both introduced during the colonial period, there is no correlation between the length of time that an animal has been on the island and the extent of its present metaphorical use – either in metaphorical naming or metaphors referring to humans. Mammals that have been longer on Flores, such as pigs, porcupines, and civets, not to mention the native Giant rat, inform fewer metaphorical names than do more recent introductions, such as water buffalo, horses, cats, and perhaps goats (but see Forth 2016, 85). Clearly, then, more important in this connection are factors such as size, familiarity, and resemblance to humans. Varieties of Motivation Like differences revealed in the metaphorical use of animals of different kinds, other conclusions that can be drawn from the Nage corpus also have a more general relevance for the understanding of conventional metaphor. First, it is abundantly clear that a single animal can provide the vehicle for quite different metaphors with different referents, applying for the most part to very different human attributes or behaviours, both positive and negative. To recall just one example, reflecting different habits of the bird, the Channel-billed cuckoo can represent either a scrounger (No. 255) or a valued messenger (257). In other words, when used as metaphors, animal categories are polysemic, capable of conveying a variety of different meanings. Clearly then, it is not the category, or the whole animal considered as a gestalt, that conveys meaning but selected features of an animal – and in

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

315

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 316

the majority of cases just one or a few, so that in any single metaphor many attributes of an animal play no motivational role, even though these may be equally known to language users. To be sure, two or more metaphors sometimes draw on the same feature of the same animals – the belly of the Giant rat (Nos. 177–9), the tail of the drongo (Nos. 316, 317), and the bill of the kingfisher (Nos. 374, 375) – but this is less usual. In the same vein, named or unnamed higher order folk taxa – most notably the “folk-intermediates” evident mostly in the classification of birds (e.g., diurnal birds of prey, pigeons, and doves, the several named kinds of bats; see Forth 2016, 166–71) – reveal little coincidence with single metaphorical themes or clusters of metaphors displaying similar meanings. The only possible exceptions concern three birds of prey whose names refer metaphorically to mourners or, in one case, to the soul of a dead person (Nos. 321, 355, 377), and three metaphors employing doves or pigeons, all of which allude to human sexual or romantic attraction (Nos. 352, 353, 404). Employing birds subsumed in an intermediate taxon of “crows and crowlike birds,” metaphors incorporating the two large cuckoos (muta me and toe ou the Channel-billed cuckoo and the koel) – both parasites of crows – are identically motivated by the useful character of their calls as chronological signs (Nos. 256–9 and Nos. 382–3). Yet other birds belonging to this category – such as actual crows – have no such significance, and, in general, semantic differences among Nage animal metaphors reveal no comprehensive or systematic connection with Nage folk zoological taxonomy. This point was made previously in regard to taxonomy and symbolic uses of animals generally (Forth 2016, e.g., 272–5). Yet Nage metaphors illuminate a further difference between taxonomic treatment of animals and their metaphorical use. Whereas a taxonomy necessarily builds on general knowledge of the form and habits of different creatures, in several instances Nage are mostly unfamiliar with an animal vehicle, knowing just enough about the creature to employ the metaphor consistently and maintain an interpretation. Examples include metaphors incorporating the deer name lota (Nos. 167–8), the dolphin (463), and crustacean larvae (560). Although less pronounced than the linked properties of polysemy and selectivity, another common quality of Nage animal metaphors is synonymity – the use of very different animals to convey the same or very similar meanings. A number of instances are set out in table 2. To these might be added the numerous metaphors referring to boisterous, misbehaving children or

316

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 317

infants crying. This is not to claim that all metaphors in table 2 possess completely identical meanings. For example, “having a neck like a banana beetle” (No. 523) describes someone who is too inclined to give into requests, whereas “horse with a flexible neck” (No. 47) alludes to a more general, and somewhat more positive, attitude of compliance. Also, a good number of metaphors have meanings additional to the one synonymous with the meaning of another metaphor. Nevertheless, the various comparisons clearly show how features (and, in most instances, specifically behaviours) of very different animals can serve similar, and sometimes very similar, metaphorical ends. From the foregoing examples it should be evident how synonymy connects with the typically selective character of the metaphors – the way they focus on a single behavioural or morphological attribute that is comparable in two otherwise different animals. In other instances, this same meaning is conveyed by different single features of different animals – for example, “squeezed frog,” “gecko’s eggs,” and “eyeballs of a snail,” all describing a person with bulging eyes (see table 2). In a couple of cases synonymous or semantically similar metaphors involve phylogenetically similar animals displaying more or less identical behaviours – for instance, the squirming movements of two sorts of insect larvae (maggots and wrigglers) or flies swarming around sores and grasshoppers swarming around dog faeces (see table 2). But this does not compromise the fact that it is specific single attributes of the animals concerned that define the particular vehicles of two or more semantically similar metaphors. And as has already been demonstrated, comparable usages mostly involve very dissimilar animals, including mammals and birds, reptiles and mammals, mammals and invertebrates, and so on. Interestingly, particular physical similarities between animals belonging to different life forms also inform more or less speculative ideas Nage maintain concerning permanent transformations of one kind of animal into another – for example, bats into civets (Forth 2016, 276–94). For the present, however, I would just note that none of these transformations has motivated any animal metaphor. Given that selectivity and specificity are basic to both the polysemy of individual animal metaphors and the synonymity of a good number, a question arises as to the nature of the specific qualities selected. From discussion of individual metaphors it is abundantly clear that a large majority are motivated by empirical attributes of the animals concerned – that is, by specific elements of their physical form or behaviour. Since for the very most part

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

317

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 318

Table 2 Examples of synonymity in animal metaphors Metaphors

Common referent

Buffalo that wrecks its enclosure (13),

People who cause trouble within

cat biting its own tail (145), rat inside

their own group

a bamboo rafter (186) Horse with a soft neck (47), dog that is

A compliant person

tame with everyone (98), banana beetle (523) Pregnant mare (53), Giant rat (177, 178,

Person with a large or

179), bullfrog (474, 475)

distended belly

Horse that dances to the drum (41),

Someone who is too “quick off the

horse with its bridle removed (48),

mark,” especially when food is

bronzeback whose tail alone remains

being served

(436) Ram’s horn (62), cat’s tail (144)

A dishonest or devious person

Goat droppings (70), scattered like

A group that is disunited

civets (205), dispersed like monkeys (209) Goat on the mountain side (75),

Something that distracts a person’s

rat above (185)

attention

Dog waiting for bones (100), monkey

Person who declines to act or does

sitting halfway up a tree (227), dove

not act immediately

looking at a pool of water (401) Dog pissing at the edge of a path (93), fly alighting on sores (516)

Someone who acts inconsistently or inconstantly, e.g., quickly changing tasks

Child of a wild pig (120), child of a skink (448)

An illegitimate child

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 319

Metaphors

Common referent

Civet in a dead Arenga palm (202),

Someone who rarely leaves home

rat inside a bamboo rafter (186), grub

or mixes with others

sniffing its own arse (543) Rat without an escape hole (189),

A person who gets into a situation

earthworm unable to reenter the

from which he cannot extricate

earth (561)

himself

Mouth like a shrew (198), mouth like

Someone who talks constantly

a chicken’s anus (277) Dove looking at a pool of water (401),

Someone present at an undertaking

cockroach on the edge of a plate (532)

but who does not participate

Monitor lizard collecting black ants

A lazy person who waits to be fed

(441), tadpole feeding on dirt (484), praying mantis on top of a cotton blossom (498) Monitor’s penis (445), crocodile down

A man who engages in

by the coast (486)

indiscriminate sex

Biting like a Tokay gecko (451),

A stingy person

small wasp (501) Grasshoppers around dog faeces (492),

People immediately drawn to

flies round a sore (518)

something

Squeezed frog (476), gecko’s eggs (452), A person with bulging eyes eyeballs like a snail (565) Crawling bedbug (538), moving like

A person who moves very slowly

a slug (566) Maggot (541), mosquito larva (545)

A person who cannot keep still

Termite (535), grub (544)

A person with unseen negative qualities, who does undetected harm

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 320

these are attributes Nage themselves identify, these motivations, or the local interpretations of which they form part, might be called “cultural.” But this applies only in the most general or minimal sense of the term, and since a large majority of Nage metaphors appear to be zoologically well-founded – which is to say, in accord with what anyone with knowledge of the animals, regardless of cultural background, would agree are accurate attributes of the creatures in question – the same number would be quite readily intelligible without any detailed or comprehensive knowledge of Nage culture or society. To be clear, this is not to claim that interpretations or usual referents of a metaphor will be completely obvious simply from familiarity with an animal, even to Nage, since these must be learned in the same way as any conventional usage – as anglophones will know from first encountering certain English metaphors. Rather, the point is that the motivation of most Nage animal metaphors would be readily comprehensible to an outsider from familiarity with the creature’s empirical attributes (e.g., the urinational habit of dogs) and components of the referent to which these correspond (inconstant human activity). In contrast, a minority of animal metaphors – fewer than 20 percent (110 of the total 566) – are motivated by culturally specific ideas and practices pertaining to an animal, and although these are themselves commonly, and often obviously, grounded in the animal’s empirical attributes (the defecatory habits of flying foxes, No. 241; the lines on a skink, No. 448), knowledge of culturally particular beliefs, activities, and institutions is crucial to understanding the metaphor. Equally based in experience are the calls of birds employed as chronological signs, a kind of value that, moreover, is recognized the world over. All the same, these calls are culturally specific insofar as Nage make use of vocalizations of specific birds in the organization of specific, especially agricultural, activities; and notwithstanding their partly empirical character I further describe such motivations, like other culturally specific practices and ideas, as “non-empirical” in reference to this culturally contingent aspect. In the Nage case, the largest number of culturally specific motivations can further be specified as “utilitarian” since they concern, for example, the use of animals as bridewealth, methods of caring for animals (tethering or enclosing them), and hunting and agricultural practices. Some reflect even more particular practices involving animals, such as the customary method of slaughtering pigs (No. 127) or the children’s use of rhinoceros beetles as playthings (No. 526). On the other hand, many practical uses of

320

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 321

animals find no expression in metaphors – for example, the use of shellfish to produce lime, net-weights, and ornaments; the use of tail feathers of domestic cocks and the bright yellow plumage of the oriole as ceremonial decoration (specifically for men’s headdresses, spears, and other weapons); or keeping monkeys and less commonly civets and wild birds as pets. Of course, most animals have some use for Nage, if only because they consume almost all mammals as well as many birds, fish, frogs, two kinds of lizards, and not a few varieties of invertebrates (Forth 2016, 237–9). So I should stress that, here, I refer to specific practical uses they make of animals and how, in some instances, these uses are essential to a metaphor’s motivation. At the same time, I also count metaphors motivated by negative values of animals, specifically the many creatures that do damage to crops (or, in the case of raptorial birds, prey on chickens, or steal juice as it is collected from palms in the case of friarbirds and sunbirds) or, like poisonous snakes and biting insects, cause personal harm or annoyance. (I do so advisedly, however, since many of these values are quite directly inferable from empirical observation or experience of the creatures concerned.) Besides utilitarian values, other culturally particular factors motivating the appearance of animals in a small number of metaphors – just eight or less than 2 percent of the total of 566, and less than a quarter of all “culturally” motivated metaphors – can be called symbolic. Anthropologists commonly use “symbolic,” a useful odd-job word, to distinguish properties or associations of things that, although often traceable to empirical qualities of the thing in question, are themselves non-empirical in that observation does not confirm them and may even contradict them. Among symbolic properties informing Nage animal metaphors are the appearance of the animal in cosmological beliefs (e.g., the dung-beetle’s role in earthquakes, No. 520), in magic and taboo (e.g., “ascending snakes,” No. 427; and the witu tui bird, No. 415), and in folktales and myths (e.g., the origin of the whistler, No. 418).2 As instances of “symbolic” motivation I also include metaphorical names of spirits and similarly supernatural or mysterious entities in which the names of animals appear (e.g., “speckled fowl,” No. 297). Other motivating ideas are not symbolic in any of the foregoing respects but are no less non-empirical, especially as they are not borne out by experience of animals – as Nage themselves sometimes recognize. These ideas can also be called “symbolic” in a cognitive sense, where the term distinguishes representations that require a special kind of cognitive processing in order

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

321

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 322

to survive in the absence of any firm empirical foundation (e.g., Sperber 1975; Boyer 1994). Although sometimes received sceptically by Nage, such representations are not themselves metaphors and, as discussed in chapter 2, can only be called “beliefs.” A good example concerns the skink, a small lizard that is widely described as being able to impregnate female pigs (Forth 2016, 298–300). Many Nage doubt that this is true, yet with reference to the proposition they apply the metaphor “child of a skink” (No. 448) to a person whose biological father is unknown or undisclosed. Although apparently disputed less often, another instance of such ideas motivating a metaphor is the notion that earthworms, after emerging from the earth, are unable ever to re-enter (No. 561). Besides the metaphor, this notion also informs a magical procedure used to counter witchcraft. But by all indications, the procedure is simply a further effect of the non-empirical idea and is neither the source nor product of the metaphor. In fact, it is more likely in this case that an unfounded idea concerning an animal’s behaviour has its main source in the conventional metaphor (Forth 2016, 259–60), a possibility further suggested by the metaphor describing male rats as having only one testicle (No. 180). A connection between magic and metaphor is further revealed in the practice of tying a piece of the desiccated tail of a bronzeback snake to the tail of a horse to increase the horse’s speed (202). But rather than this practice inspiring a comparable metaphor (No. 434), both the metaphor and the magic obviously reflect the empirically well-founded status of the bronzeback as the fastest of snakes. Additional examples of non-empirical ideas motivating animal metaphors include the notion that flying foxes lack an anus (No. 241) and the claim that the Island pipe snake, or “two-headed snake” (No. 426), actually has two heads. In none of the foregoing instances is the animal identified with any sort of spirit. But in this respect they are little different from other symbolically motivated metaphors for in hardly any case does the identification of an animal with a spiritual being play a decisive part in motivating a conventional animal metaphor. As demonstrated elsewhere (Forth 1998, 2016), among the most prominent forms of Nage animal symbolism is a series of beliefs linking specific animals with spiritual beings – including free spirits (i.e., forest, water, or mountain spirits, all designated as nitu), spirits of the dead, and human souls. Free spirits, Nage say, will occasionally, incidentally, and situationally assume the form of a snake or eel, or less often a fish, crustacean, or bird – thus all non-mammals. At the same time, Nage describe wild mam-

322

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 323

mals as the domestic animals of these spirits, a conception they extend to one wild bird, the junglefowl (kata), identified as the spirits’ chickens. Further beliefs linking animals with spirits include the idea that a Brahminy kite, a bird of prey, can manifest malevolent mountain spirits out looking for human victims; a contextual identification of certain smaller birds and some invertebrates with souls of dead or living humans; and the belief that both owls and diurnal birds of prey manifest the spiritual aspect of human witches. But not a single one of these ideas plays any significant part in conventional animal metaphors. This brief digression into Nage spiritual cosmology serves to make a major point, for the virtual absence of beliefs connecting animals and spirits in the motivations of Nage animal metaphors is a signal finding of the present study. Probably the clearest proof is the fact that none of the twenty-two snake metaphors is connected with the status of snakes as the life form Nage mostly identify with free spirits. Nor are any metaphors employing eels or fish – other possible manifestations of these spirits – or any of the numerous metaphors incorporating wild mammals (the spirits’ livestock). In fact, the python, the snake Nage most often identify as a situational manifestation of a free spirit, provides the vehicle of just a single metaphor, and this focuses not on any spiritual association but solely on the snake’s well-attested swallowing ability. The same disconnection was previously remarked in reference to the Nage belief that human beings exist simultaneously as water buffalo belonging to mountain spirits (chapter 2). This notion leaves no impression in any of their thirty-three buffalo metaphors, even though according to some commentators one of these (No. 2) links the extraordinary powers of “transforming buffalo” (a metaphor for human duplicity) to a special spiritual entity, a type of “soul,” possessed exclusively by certain buffalo bulls selected for sacrifice. The metaphorical naming of a dead person’s soul, or indeed corpse, as an “earth buffalo” (No. 31) does indeed reflect spiritual ideas, as does the single metaphor employing the cuckoo-shrike, a bird Nage contextually regard as a dead human soul come to summon another to death. But this does not apply to three other bird metaphors – those employing the kite (No. 377), pigeon (No. 391), and the unspecific “sea fowl” (No. 280) – since their interpretation as references to human souls is exclusive to these particular metaphors. It also seems significant that all three occur in songs of mourning (as in fact does the cuckoo-shrike metaphor) and that in two the bird is alternatively identifiable with living mourners. But a more important point is that none of these four

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

323

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 324

bird metaphors, nor the two buffalo metaphors, implicates Nage ideas about free spirits (the beings generally known as nitu). Contrariwise, many birds that Nage do identify with spirits either do not occur as metaphorical vehicles or, where they do, are evidently not selected for their spiritual associations. Examples of the latter are the Large-billed crow, owl, and drongo – all three classified by Nage as “witch birds.” Similarly, neither of the two metaphors employing the stubtail draws on this bird’s status as an omen, and while Nage identify the whistler with souls of deceased infants, this association is evidently secondary to the myth that also motivates the metaphor (Forth 2004a, 87–8). Absent altogether from the Nage corpus are the Flores crow (another witch bird), a bird named koa ka (possibly another name for the koel, Nos. 382, 383), the deza kela (a small bird whose poignant song is thought to manifest a distressed soul), and the nightjar, a bird that, although not associated with any sort of spirit, is a bad omen for nocturnal hunters (Forth 2004a, 100–1, and see pp.17–23 for ornithological identifications of all these birds). In the same way, butterflies and spiders are not employed in any metaphors, although Nage contextually identify both as visible forms assumed by spiritual beings, including human souls. As for snakes, the only metaphor motivated by a non-empirical idea of any sort is “ascending snakes” (No. 427), which, as a reference to driftwood, reflects the magical (and therefore non-spiritual) belief that burning such wood can cause snakes to enter the house. As noted, less than a fifth of Nage animal metaphors are motivated by culturally specific uses of any sort. Details are provided in table 3, in which distinctions are further registered between different animal life forms, between utilitarian and symbolic values, and also between different sorts of utilitarian or symbolic value. Distinguishing the use of animals in exchange between affines is informative because the prescribed use of different animals as bridewealth or counter-gift can partly be viewed as symbolic, as in one sense can the value of bird vocalizations as chronological signs. Also, negative utilitarian values of animals, composing by far the commonest sort of utilitarian value, are usefully distinguished from positive values. And on the “symbolic” side, metaphorical names for spirits of otherwise non-empirical beings need to be separated from metaphors crucially informed by the part played by animals in Nage cosmology, magic, and myth. Table 3 shows how utilitarian value far outweighs symbolic value in the motivation of Nage animal metaphors. Yet a more important finding is that over

324

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 325

Table 3 Cultural factors motivating animal metaphors Mammals (in

Birds

Snakes

parentheses:

and other

domestic/wild)

vertebrates

Invertebrates

Totals

UTILITARIAN Bridewealth,

(8/0)

3

0

0

11

15

0

0

15

1

4

3

22

11

1

16

34

28

30

5

19

82

Cosmological,

5

7

1

3

15

mythical, magical

(2/3) 1

3

0

0

4

3

2

2

1

8

12

3

4

27

affinal exchange Chronological signs (Other) positive

0 14

Utilitarian value

(14/0)

Negative utilitarian

6

value

(1/5)

Total utilitarian SYMBOLIC

significance Supernatural beings or mystical entities named after animals Other non-empirical

(0/3) Total symbolic Total cultural Total metaphors

9 37 240 (162/78)

42

8

23

110

178

73

75

566

four-fifths of the metaphors are quite straightforwardly motivated by empirical factors and thus unaffected by specific cultural considerations of any kind, utilitarian or otherwise. According to a received view in anthropology, the practical value of animals and plants is the main driver in the construction of folk taxonomies. In my previous book (Forth 2016) I explain why I find this view erroneous and how it is contradicted by the Nage evidence. Applying

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

325

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 326

equally to symbolic values of animals, obviously the critique can now be extended from taxonomy to conventional metaphor. Table 3 also facilitates generalizations concerning different animal life forms. The largest number of metaphors reflecting cultural values have birds as their vehicles (over 38 percent), closely followed by mammals (34 percent). All metaphors relating to chronological signs involve birds and specifically their vocalizations. Occurring more often in metaphors contained in the lyrics of song and other poetic genres than do other animals, birds are also prominent in other metaphors reflecting symbolic values, and this too is largely attributable to values Nage attach to bird vocalizations. Invertebrates occur in a surprisingly large proportion of culturally motivated metaphors, making up 21 percent of the total. In addition, such metaphors compose over 30 percent of all invertebrate metaphors. But both figures are mostly accounted for by the negative utilitarian value of biting, pestilential, or otherwise bothersome insects; and symbolic representations of invertebrates, by contrast, have a far smaller influence. For obvious reasons, domestic mammals are the commonest vehicles of metaphors shaped by practices involving exchange between affines. On the other hand, while domesticates are the most economically valuable of animals, and furthermore provide vehicles for a very large number of metaphors generally (208, combining the totals for mammals, chickens, and domestic ducks), specific uses of domestic animals play a relatively minor part in metaphorical motivation. Accordingly, utilitarian value fails to explain why metaphors incorporating no less valuable horses and pigs are low in comparison to those employing buffalo, dogs, and chickens. And the point applies equally to wild animals, among which deer, valued with wild pigs as the most important type of game, occur as the vehicle of no more metaphors than do civets. Animal Names and Metaphor Usually combining with empirical attributes, other non-empirical factors affecting the metaphorical deployment of specific animals in conventional metaphors are aspects of an animal’s name. As discussed in previous chapters, monomials – names comprising a single lexeme (or “word”) – appear to be preferred over binomials. Monomial naming might thus be counted as another reason for the greater metaphorical employment of mammals, almost all of which are named monomially, especially as regards folk-generics (like

326

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 327

“buffalo,” “dog,” “deer,” “rat or mouse,” “civet,” and so on). Folk-specifics, on the other hand, are typically named with binomials – like wawi witu (“forest pig”), which names wild as opposed to domestic pigs. But among mammals folk-specifics are far fewer than among other life forms, and besides wawi witu the only mammal folk-specific used metaphorically is ngo ngoe, denoting what is considered a particular kind of wild cat. Quite another matter is why some animals are named monomially in the first place. Universally, monomial names are applied far more often to folk-generics than to folk-specifics or other folk biological categories (Berlin 1992), and among Nage such names are most commonly applied to mammal generics – and then, as shown just above, more consistently to domestic than to wild animals. As suggested by Berlin, these differences are likely bound up with how frequently people talk about particular animals, a variable connected not only with different practical uses made of animals but also with a variety of other values, arguably including how often an animal category is employed in conventional metaphor. A question thus arises as to the extent to which metaphorical uses of animals may contribute to the development of monomial names, but this is a topic I am unable to treat properly here. Another factor influencing the metaphorical use of particular animals is prosodic effects of animal names – the fit between the name and other elements (verbs, adjectives) of a conventional expression effected by rhyme, assonance, or alliteration. Only occasionally do Nage themselves mention the character of a name when discussing possible motivations of an animal metaphor (see No. 532). Even so, prosody is discernible in a variety of expressions and moreover occurs not just in metaphors employed in song or parallel speech but equally in metaphors heard in ordinary conversation. In many instances, prosody appears to have been more influential in the selection of other elements of an expression rather than in the selection of the animal name, especially where a metaphor appears sufficiently accounted for by empirical features of the animal or by its cultural value. The distinction is often difficult to make out, and since Nage lexemes comprise either monosyllabic or bisyllabic words, lack terminal consonants, and contain a limited number of vowels and vowel combinations, it is not always clear whether prosodic effects are influential or incidental, especially in regard to assonance. Nevertheless, around 10 percent of animal metaphors (fifty-seven of the total of 566) suggest some prosodic effects in their overall composition.3 Of these, the prosodic quality of an animal’s name appears to be a substantial factor

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

327

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 328

motivating its occurrence in about twenty expressions, though rarely it seems the sole factor. Instances include: meo déto (No. 156); ‘udu kutu (No. 171); pe’u bétu (No. 176); base … dhéke hase (No. 180); dhéke néke bétu (No. 182); ‘o’a sawi wawi (No. 225); ‘o’a to, gala bha (No. 235); ana go dhego go (No. 254); céce … ne’e, koka … mona (No. 318); bio bido (No. 326); ceka leza (No. 333); leo be’o (No. 339); bopo … tolo … mogo (No. 353); sizo io … nio (No. 355); héke muke (No. 356); lala … kata mala (No. 369); iki puki teka (No. 372); pake ne’e ate, kuza ne’e tuka (No. 481); eo ne tépo (No. 515); and ngoi ngata (552). Although less common, yet another linguistic factor evidently shaping some animal metaphors concerns what I have previously called binary composites (Forth 2016, 140–8) – standard expressions in which the names of two animals are regularly combined. One example is kutu bétu, “porcupine [and] Giant rat” (Nos. 171 and 176). Binary composites usually comprise animals that are physically similar, so their composition has a definite empirical basis. Nevertheless, such composites almost never name taxonomic categories – for example, higher order folk taxa (life forms or folk-intermediates) that systematically subsume folk-generics. Moreover, a single category can appear in more than one composite – a possibility illustrated by “goat,” which is contextually paired with three other animals. Accordingly, binary composites are typically used as components of non-taxonomic, special-purpose classifications – for example, when speaking about game animals, animals required as bridewealth, and so on. Besides the metaphorical pairing of “porcupine” and “Giant rat,” the influence of binary composites is evident in expressions incorporating “buffalo” and “horse” (Nos. 8, 37); “sheep” and “goat” (Nos. 65, 73); “goat” and “pig” (Nos. 71, 129); “goat” and “dog” (Nos. 74, 92); “dog” and “pig” (Nos. 86, 121); “deer” and “(wild) pig” (Nos. 130, 163); “Fruit dove” and “Imperial pigeon” (Nos. 353, 362); and “quail” and “Spotted dove” (Nos. 393, 405, 402, 405). Some of these usages, it should be noted, also reveal prosodic effects, for example, ‘usa ‘Ua (“goat of ‘Ua,” No. 73) and lebu Kebi (“sheep of Kebi,” No. 65), two phrases sometimes uttered in combination. And for this reason, and because of the influence of physical and behavioural factors, either in the formation of binary composites or in the motivation of animal metaphors generally, it would be misleading to count conventional metaphors reflecting composites as additional instances of metaphors motivated by cultural, linguistic, or broadly “non-empirical” values. Also requiring mention are the incidence of metaphors pairing animal categories that are not combined in standard binary composites and, con-

328

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 329

versely, how not all composites are reflected in conventional metaphors. For example, the composite ‘o’a ghoa, “monkey [and] monitor lizard” – one of two combining a mammal and a non-mammal (Forth 2016, 144; the other is “quail [and] rat,” piko dhéke) – is not attested in any metaphor, while, on the other hand, several metaphors connect “monkey,” parallelistically, with “porcupine” (No. 173), “civet” (No. 205), “cockatoo” (No. 309), “fish fry” (Nos. 233, 470), and a snake (the bronzeback, No. 235). In comparison to mammals and birds, reptiles and other non-mammals are included in fewer binary composites, a circumstance that would explain why no metaphors reflect standard pairings of animals of these kinds. Several composites combine invertebrate categories, and Nage employ three of these as conventional metaphors (metu mule, No. 508; emu hale, No. 519; and maju mela, Nos. 536, 537), doing so moreover without separating the components with verbs or modifiers as is usually done in metaphorical applications of mammal and bird composites. Finally, three metaphors, all employing birds, are partly motivated by the homonymy of the birds’ names and phenomena alluded to in their respective interpretations – specifically, ana go (No. 254), manu miu (No. 283), and kuku raku (No. 417). Although not reproduced in any metaphor, another possible example is the full name of the bushchat, tute péla, specifically the second component of the name in regard to the referent of one metaphor that employs this bird (identified simply as tute, No. 251). However, whether dealing with homonymy, monomial naming, prosody, or binary composites, linguistic effects, wherever they are evident in Nage animal metaphors, are virtually always found in conjunction with other motivational factors – either empirical features or cultural associations of the animal vehicle – and, as the interpretations of Nage commentators would suggest, are influenced far more by these than by properties of the animal’s name. Prosody especially should be considered as a factor contributing to the memorability of metaphorical expressions, yet it is clearly not the only factor hypothetically contributing to the survival of conventional expressions. Generalizations and Further Interpretations Several general features of Nage animal metaphors are now well established. Among these is a use of specific attributes of animal kinds to make statements about equally specific features of other things – most notably, of course, human beings. In addition, in the majority of cases these attributes

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

329

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 330

are empirical, comprising particular morphological or behavioural features that, I would stress, are typically available to a panhuman observation of the creatures in question. The remainder are then motivated by non-empirical, culturally specific attributes of animals, relating either to practical uses of specific animals or ideas about animals reflecting specific cosmological or other values of the sort that have generally been called symbolic. A review of motivational factors has also revealed a general incompatibility or inconsistency between, on the one hand, the use of animals in conventional metaphors and, on the other, cultural values attributed to the same animals, especially in Nage spiritual cosmology. Partly illuminating this phenomenon is the specific and selective character not only of metaphorical value but also both cosmological and utilitarian values of animals – that is, the fact that all these values reflect a limited number of an animal’s features, and often just one (e.g., the shape of its tail, colour of its pelage or plumage, its nocturnal habit, the significance of its calls, or the practical use made of some part of an animal). In this respect, the relative absence of cultural values reflected in the motivation of animal metaphors might be attributed to a tendency to select different features of the same animal when it is used to construct a metaphor and when it serves other cultural purposes. But there is evidently more to the matter than this, and to reach a fuller solution we need to treat symbolic and utilitarian uses of animals separately. The first thing to recall is that the number of metaphors reflecting utilitarian values is far higher than those reflecting an animal’s symbolic significance – in Nage cosmology, mythology, and the like. As regards utilitarian values, differential selectivity of particular traits does indeed go some way to explaining the relative absence of such values as motivation for conventional metaphors. And this is largely because the practical uses to which particular animals are put – for example, as raw materials or items of exchange – are limited and are far exceeded by numerous other features available for use as vehicles of conventional metaphor. Here it should also be recalled that, of the several varieties of utilitarian significance distinguished in table 3, it is an animal’s negative value that informs the greatest number of metaphors, over 40 percent (thirty-four of eighty-two). Symbolic uses of animals, by contrast, are subject to rather fewer restrictions, but there are other differences as well. As demonstrated, beliefs linking animals with spirits are virtually absent from the motivation of Nage animal metaphors. To be sure, animal categories occur in a small number

330

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 331

of metaphorical names denoting spiritual beings, among which might be counted “earth buffalo,” denoting the soul or corpse of a dead person. But in these cases, a spirit (or something else neither clearly human nor animal, like the “miu fowl,” No. 296, and “highland quail,” No. 397, both manifest only as mysterious sounds) is of course the referent of the expression rather than a factor in the motivation of the metaphor, applying to a human or anything else. As for other symbolically motivated metaphors, the value of the animal reflects its significance in Nage myth, magic, or taboo, where the creature in question has no association with spirits. In view of the prominence of animals both in Nage representations of spiritual beings and in their conventional metaphors, the fact that spiritual associations of animals play virtually no part in motivating the metaphors may appear puzzling. The circumstance might seem all the more curious when it comes to animals, such as snakes, that Nage describe as phenomenally manifesting otherwise anthropomorphous spirits. Yet a solution can be found in cognitive differences between two sorts of representations, particularly those discussed in chapter 2 distinguishing metaphor from belief. For example, a person working inconstantly leads Nage to think of a urinating dog, and does so by virtue of the conventional metaphor – a standard representation. The metaphor might also cause people observing a urinating dog to think about people they know. But in either case, the similarity is recognized simply as a resemblance, so that speaking of someone as a urinating dog is understood as a figurative statement, a conscious and deliberate, though socially and discursively useful, fiction. By contrast, someone observing a Brahminy kite flying unusually high and circling without descending may well interpret this phenomenon, in accordance with a general belief, as a malevolent mountain spirit in search of a human victim (Forth 1998, 151–2; see also No. 377), just as an owl calling unusually close to a dwelling, especially one containing someone who is seriously ill, is likely to be interpreted as signalling an imminent death (Forth 2004a, 69). Or to take another case, a person coming across an unusually large or odd-coloured eel will be inclined to see this as a manifestation of a water spirit, the leader of a group of such spirits or the spiritual “guardian” of the water, which he or she will therefore avoid harming or disturbing (Forth 2016, 218). As is clear from previous chapters, the place of eels and owls in conventional metaphor is insignificant, and while metaphors involving kites are somewhat more numerous, none definitely reflects the possible spiritual significance of

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

331

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 332

these birds. But the more general point is that Nage encountering the same creatures will recognize, if only as a potentiality, real connections between the animal and a spirit, so for Nage these ideas are anything but metaphoric, figuring instead as beliefs informing, if only situationally, people’s relations with the animals, including the observance of taboos and ritual practices intended to counteract negative consequences of encounters. It therefore follows that hypothetical expressions like “high-flying kite” or “hooting owl nearby” would not be suitable as conventional metaphors, especially if applied to a person in direct address, because the spiritual associations of the images they convey would obviously compromise any metaphorical intent. If conveying any meaning at all, the statements would very likely be taken literally – as implying either that the person was a spirit (which for Nage would actually convey no definite significance) or that he or she was a witch, an inference that could have serious social consequences.4 The place of animal metaphors in social relations is discussed in the next chapter. For the present another, possibly related, difference deserves attention. In metaphors, mammals and especially domestic mammals predominate, while in (non-metaphorical) spiritual representations mammals are in fact underrepresented, and accordingly, snakes, birds, other non-mammalian vertebrates, and even invertebrates are more prominent. Spiritual representations incorporating mammals are in fact confined to a view of wild mammals as spirits’ livestock and the belief that the spirit of a witch can assume the form of a rat or mouse. (Buffalo are associated with spirits only to the extent that humans are thought to exist as spirit buffalo and, according to a piece of specialist knowledge, sacrificial buffalo are as it were contextual embodiments of buffalo-owing spirits.) In part, this contrast of life forms is consistent with a view of spirits generally, and especially free spirits and witches, as having no proper place inside human settlements, which for a large part is where domestic animals also reside. But the zoological opposition further reflects a cosmological principle whereby spirits, both free spirits and human souls, are conceived as unseen but essentially human-like beings that very occasionally become visible or otherwise phenomenally manifest only in the form of creatures that are most dissimilar to humans. As demonstrated, the predominance of mammals in conventional metaphors, on the other hand, largely corresponds to their greater physical similarity to humans. In addition, the contrast with spirits and their incidental manifestations as very non-human animals arguably accords with a Nage view of spirits of all kinds as fundamentally in-

332

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 333

verted beings (see note 4), a point documented at length in other writings (Forth 1998; Forth 2016). Why Animals? While it is sufficiently clear why mammals should predominate in Nage metaphor, yet to be addressed is the larger question of why animals at all and, more specifically, why animals should occupy such a premier place as vehicles of conventional metaphors not just among Nage but the world over. Properties that make mammals better suited for metaphorical deployment than other animals – especially the many ways mammals palpably resemble humans in regard to morphology, methods of mating and reproduction, and so on – have some bearing on the metaphorical value of animals in general. But there is rather more to say, and a place to begin is differences between animals, on the one hand, and non-animals – plants, inanimate objects, artefacts – on the other. Unlike the latter, animals are by definition animated and, like humans, are capable of self-directed movement – regardless of how they differ from humans in their locomotory abilities. Also like humans, animals eat and defecate, and most species produce sounds. Of course, movement and sound are also properties of some inanimate things, like flowing water, wind, and fire. But owing to their existence as discrete individuals as well as the importance of movement for their survival, animals not only move but also engage in a variety of acts, activities, and behaviours, many of which evince specific aims and suggest definite purposes. What is more, animal actions have immediately observable effects on other things, including other animals, vegetation and inorganic components of the natural environment, and human artefacts (buildings, enclosures, and the like). Without suggesting that non-human animals are completely identical to humans in these respects, it is therefore no coincidence that the majority of animal metaphors – in Nage, English, and other languages – refer to humans acting or behaving in specific ways or displaying particular characters. And it is equally clear how plants, for example, do not serve nearly so well, even though by virtue of their ability to reproduce, grow and spread, and wither and die, and because of their visual and olfactory qualities, plants too can refer metaphorically to humans. In addition to bodily features linking animals and humans, it is to a large degree the distinctive ways in which different animals not only move but also

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

333

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 334

act or behave, both visibly and vocally, that, for people everywhere, distinguish one kind of animal from another. Indeed, distinctive physical attributes or behaviour are, in whole or in part, often the focus of animal names. Nage examples include ngo ngoe, the onomatopoeic name of a wild cat, and “sharp wing,” referring to a falcon, as well as many other Nage bird names (Forth 2004a, 17–23), while for English we might recall “roadrunner,” “rattlesnake,” “bullhead,” and many more. Apart from specific morphological or behavioural attributes of animals that can readily be compared with attributes in humans, the manifest variety of such attributes suggests another reason animals make better metaphors than does just about anything else. Especially in view of the application of animal metaphors to a variety of human behaviours, the sheer variety of animal kinds and, furthermore, variation among individual animals of the same kind with respect to age, size, and physical condition, facilitates a ready, almost ineluctable, mapping of animal variation onto human variation. Something similar might be claimed for the variety of plant species. But apart from the fact that the world contains many more species of animals than plants (though some three-quarters of the former are insects), as already shown the unequivocally greater metaphorical potential of animals is easily accounted for by factors of manifest resemblance. The foregoing observations may recall Lévi-Strauss’s analysis of totemism, which he construed as involving “metaphor” in the Jakobsonian sense. But there are important differences. First, whereas Lévi-Strauss treated totemism as pertaining to segmentary groups composing a social whole, animal metaphors, among Nage and elsewhere, refer for the most part to distinctive and often temporary and situational features of human individuals. In fact, as is shown in the next chapter, only a minority of Nage animal metaphors refer to whole social categories (gender, social ranks, age classes, and the like). Second, in Lévi-Strauss’s theory, animal totems reflect a system of differences, so that what links people to totemic species is resemblance between a series of human groups on the one hand and plants or animals on the other. Accordingly, whereas conventional metaphors turn largely on recognizable resemblances between animals and their human referents, Lévi-Strauss treated resemblance between single totems and single groups, and any putative continuity between these (e.g., the notion that members of totemic groups descend from or share kinship with their totem) as being decidedly secondary and unnecessary to the relation. At the same time, whereas Lévi-Strauss’s theory of totemism has been criticized for its dismissal of the substantial (some

334

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 335

might say “ontological”) relations between individual totems and associated human collectivities, at least one feature of his model – the diversity of animal or otherwise natural kinds, inspiring what may be described as a metaphorical application of “metaphor” – somewhat ironically turns out to be more straightforwardly applicable to conventional animal metaphors. Although the prominence of animals in metaphor is mostly explained by a combination of perceptible resemblance between animals and humans and differences between contrasting animal kinds, one should not lose sight of the multifaceted practical, intellectual, and emotional interests animals hold for humans in all societies. With respect to resemblance we should also recall the fact that metaphor requires not only similarity between items in the source and target domains but also a degree of dissimilarity. This follows from the consciously figurative – one might even say deliberately fictional – character of metaphor, which requires a sufficient disparity between vehicle and referent for a particular kind of meaning to be conveyed (cf. Morgan 1993, 129). It would therefore make little sense using “sparrow” or “crow” as a metaphor for a pigeon since this would far more likely to be taken literally and so result in miscommunication. (Calling pigeons “rats of the air,” by contrast, is quite patently metaphorical – as is calling a known simpleton a “genius.”) Among animals known to Nage I can find none that is not metaphorically exploited, or is exploited less than others, because it is too similar to possible human referents or is too close spatially or too familiar. The monkey makes the point in reverse for not only is this animal one of the commonest metaphorical vehicles, but, despite the numerous ways in which monkeys closely resemble humans – a fact Nage themselves often remark upon – monkeys are nevertheless classified as “animals” (ana wa) and definitely not as “human beings” (kita ata; Forth 2016, 130–1). In other words, for Nage, animals of all kinds occupy the same side of a great ontological divide that separates them categorically from humans. And even though a greater similarity of some animals to human beings, most notably of course mammals, partly explains their greater metaphorical use, they are all equally animals and so sufficiently different from humans to serve as metaphors. Recalling the cognitivist argument that certain ideas are appealing and survive because they involve an ideal balance of intuitive and counter-intuitive elements and so achieve a “cognitive optimum” (Boyer 1994, 121–3), it may therefore be supposed that, in regard to resemblance and difference, animals exhibit a similarly superior ratio of human and non-human qualities.

T H E M E TA P H O R I C A L VA L U E O F D I F F E R E N T A N I M A L S

335

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 336

9 Animal Metaphors in Social and Ontological Perspective

The previous chapter focuses on properties of animals motivating their use as metaphors. In this chapter I focus on the human referents of animal metaphors and thus their use in social interaction and relations among humans. After looking at the metaphors from both sides, as it were, I conclude with a discussion of what conventional animal metaphors can tell us about human-animal relations and whether they point to any distinctive ontological features in Nage thinking about animals. Connected with this last question, I show how a study of Nage animal metaphors contributes to recent anthropological discussion of ontological variation among human societies generally. Human Referents and the Use of Animal Metaphor in Social Relationships It is already clear that the majority of Nage animal metaphors have human beings as their referents. More specifically, 444 of the total of 566, or over 78 percent, do so. Among these I count five metaphors interpreted as referring to deceased human souls, most of which can also refer to living humans (specifically mourners). Almost 79 percent (189 of 240) of mammal metaphors refer to humans, thus virtually the same as the proportion for all animals. By contrast, bird metaphors reveal a slightly lower figure – just over 72 percent (129 of 178) – while the figures for other non-mammals and invertebrates are both higher (respectively, over 84 and 88 percent). Similarly, the proportion of wild mammal metaphors referring to humans (69 of 78, or

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 337

over 88 percent) is higher than metaphors incorporating domestic animals (120 of 162, or 74 percent). Accounting for these variations, however, is the higher number of birds and mammals, especially domestic mammals, employed in metaphors applied to other entities (plants, other animals, times of the day, artefacts, etc.), and, in absolute numbers, mammal and bird metaphors referring to people (317, or over 71 percent of the total of 444) still exceed metaphors incorporating other kinds of animals. As mentioned previously, only a minority of Nage animal metaphors are used self-referentially. The majority are expressed either in the second person, thus in direct address, or in the third. Where animal metaphors function as proverbs, on the other hand, they refer of course to no one in particular but instead advertise general ideas about humans or the human condition. Sometimes proverbs entail prescriptions, asserting, with reference to comparable features of animals, how people should live (e.g., Nos. 144 and 206, regarding the tails of cats and civets). But however employed, most metaphors possess a definite moral import and in this way offer insight into Nage social values. As noted in chapter 2, a majority of animal metaphors express a negative evaluation of their human referent, registering disapproval or being used derisively, in venting anger or in friendly banter as well as conventional exchanges between the sexes in the song genre called pata néke. This generally negative quality appears to bear out the commonly expressed view (though one based mostly on English metaphors) that “the great majority [of animal metaphors] are negative and pejorative” (Goatly 2006, 25; see also Sommer and Sommer 2011, who speak of “animal metaphors for human personality” as being “mostly uncomplimentary”). In some non-Western societies, however, animal metaphors appear to be proportionally more complimentary, at least contextually, as Olatéju (2005, 380) has shown for the Yoruba. And in any case, one needs to be more specific. By no means all metaphors in the Nage corpus reflect negatively on human referents. As with animal metaphors in English, a minority refer to positive qualities, while a larger number are neutral or ambiguous. “Neutral” metaphors include usages describing a relationship, practice, or institution – such as the several, mostly incorporating chickens, that distinguish human males and females or refer to relations between wife-giving and wife-taking affines (or, indeed, humans and god, No. 266). They also include many metaphors contained in proverbs, though where a proverb possesses a prescriptive aspect (e.g., “living like a porcupine,” No. 172, or “not living like a junglefowl,”

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

337

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 338

No. 367) a positive or negative sense is readily apparent. Metaphorical names for human body parts are by definition neutral. By contrast, metaphors that describe a person’s appearance by reference to a physical feature more or less peculiar to that individual (e.g., having hair like a fantail’s tail or a cockatoo’s crest, or having eyeballs like gecko’s eggs) are often used critically or derisively. Yet they can also be employed in a purely practical, descriptive way – for example, when distinguishing a person from others – and in most cases I have therefore classified them as neutral or ambiguous (two terms between which, in the present context, I do not attempt to distinguish). As these remarks should suggest, determining in which of these three categories a given metaphor fits has sometimes proved challenging, not least because a single expression can have more than one application and because interpretations sometimes combine negative and positive implications. For example, the metaphorical reference to a person having the character of the much reviled Russell’s viper (No. 430), probably the most feared of creatures known to Nage, is negative insofar as the person inspires fear in others but is also partly positive in that it implies boldness and a masterful personality. Nevertheless, in the majority of cases the determination has been reasonably straightforward. In virtually all instances evaluations have been made on the basis of informant commentary and observation of expressions in use, and if occasionally categorization has been arbitrary, this is unlikely to have affected the overall result. Results of this analysis are presented in table 4. As the table shows, over 10 percent of Nage animal metaphors are generally positive while nearly 27 percent can be classified as neutral. This then leaves a sizeable majority, around 63 percent, that are negative or uncomplimentary to human referents. Apart from lending support to the generalizations of other authors, the fact that over six in ten of the Nage metaphors refer to human traits they consider negative could be taken to reflect a generally negative attitude towards animals and even as symptomatic of a view of non-human animals as morally inferior to humans. However, the inference requires qualification. To the extent that Nage often speak negatively about non-human animals, characterizing them as lacking things they value – like houses, clothing, tools, fire, knowledge of cooking, or, in a word, “culture” (Forth 2016, 59–60) – then indeed Nage can be said to regard animals as inferior. As mentioned in chapter 1, they certainly regard humans and animals as very different sorts of beings, so that someone conceived as behaving like an animal or looking

338

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 339

like an animal is usually not looking or behaving well. Nevertheless, some qualities of animals are obviously considered positive, at least to the extent that comparable qualities of humans are also considered positive. What is more, attributes or behaviours that Nage consider undesirable in human beings are not necessarily considered undesirable, or equally undesirable, in an animal. An example is our eponymous metaphor concerning the urinating dog, which Nage apply to inconstant or inconsistent humans. Such conduct is definitely disapproved in a person. Yet Nage do not consider the way dogs urinate to be bad either for dogs or for humans; it is simply the way dogs are. As it happens, most dog metaphors, like Nage animal metaphors in general, do indeed cast their human referents in a negative light. Yet one needs to recall the typical specificity and selectivity of metaphors, the fact that they focus on just one or a few attributes of the animal vehicle; hence it cannot be assumed that qualities of an animal highlighted either in individual metaphors, or even the totality of metaphors incorporating a given animal, will be representative of any overall evaluation of that animal. Indeed, by all indications they are not. Thus not only dogs but many other animals Nage value, not just for utilitarian but for intellectual and affective reasons as well, provide vehicles for metaphors that, in the large majority of cases, reveal a negative evaluation of their human referent. On the other hand, animals Nage do not value so highly, including some they consider mostly or entirely negative, are nevertheless employed in metaphors with neutral or even positive human referents. Thus the monkey appears in four positive metaphors as does the porcupine, both animals and especially the first being known mostly for the serious damage they do to crops, and complimentary references to people can be found even among metaphors incorporating snakes, fish, and invertebrates. In general, therefore, differences in positive values that Nage attach to an animal appear not to correspond to differences in the degree to which metaphors employing that animal refer positively to attributes of human beings. There is, however, a qualification. If the figures for “positive” and “neutral” metaphors listed in table 4 are added together and then compared to the figures for negative metaphors, a somewhat different picture emerges. For the ratio of negative to positive and neutral usages then accords quite well with an animal’s overall value in Nage life. In particular, the figure for horses is 1:1, for pigs 5:3, and for buffalo and dogs 13:7. No other mammal begins to approach these ratios, except for the porcupine; however, the total number of metaphors incorporating this animal – just four – is very low.

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

339

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 340

Table 4 Human values in animal metaphors: life forms and

selected individual categories Total of

Metaphors

Generally

Generally

Neutral,

all

referring

negative

positive

ambiguous

metaphors

to humans

162

120

85

11

24

Buffalo

33

20

13

2

5

Horse

26

24

12

4

8

Cattle

2

2

2

0

0

Sheep

6

6

6

0

0

Goat

16

13

11

0

2

Dog

35

26

19

1

6

Domestic mammals (total)

Pig

25

16

10

4

2

Cat

19

13

12

0

1

Wild

78

69

55

9

5

mammals (total) Deer

8

6

5

1

0

Porcupine

5

4

2

2

0

Giant rat Rat, mouse

4

4

4

0

0

17

13

10

0

3

Shrew

4

4

4

0

0

Civet

8

7

5

2

0

32

31

25

4

2

All mammals

240

189

140

20

29

Birds

178

128

46

14

68

Monkey

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 341

Other

Total of

Metaphors

Generally

Generally

Neutral,

all

referring

negative

positive

ambiguous

metaphors

to humans

73

61

43

9

9

Snakes

22

16

12

2

2

Lizards

19

16

12

2

2

vertebrates (total)

Fish

12

12

5

4

3

Frogs

11

10

7

1

2

5

4

4

0

0

Invertebrates

75

66

49

4

13

Grand totals

566

444

279

47

119

Crocodile

Cats, on the other hand, produce a contrary result, as all but one of the thirteen cat metaphors with human referents are negative and none is positive – in spite of the value these animals hold as mousers and a Nage conception of house cats as quite special creatures, indicated by several taboos and other usages (Forth 2016, 103–4). The figures for deer are also surprising in view of their status as the most highly prized of game animals. Just one of the six deer metaphors is positive while the remainder are all negative; but the total for this animal is also low (the same as for virtually extra-territorial sheep). This too is a surprising result, and yet another surprise comes with the figures for fish and geckos. Just 5 of the 12 fish metaphors refer negatively to humans, while 3 are neutral and 4 are positive (thus yielding a ratio of 5:7, higher than those for all mammals). Similarly, 3 of the 7 metaphors employing the Tokay gecko are negative while 2 of the remaining 4 are positive and 2 are neutral. (Metaphors employing other lizards as vehicles – monitors and skinks – are negative without exception.) Bird metaphors require a separate mention since, in comparison with metaphors incorporating all other life forms, the number with negative human referents is low, less than 36 percent of the total of 128. By the same

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

341

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 342

token, the ratio of negative to positive and neutral metaphors combined is just over 1:2 (46:82). Even so, the proportion of bird metaphors with positive referents (11 percent) is only slightly higher than that for all mammals (10.6 percent) and is actually lower than that for wild mammals (13 percent), and it is accordingly the number of neutral referents that is high (over 53 percent). The relatively fewer negative associations of bird metaphors can then be attributed to the relatively high number that refer to human body parts, bodily features (long-leggedness, short stature), hair styles (compared to birds’ crests and tails), and vocal qualities, the majority of which are neither clearly positive nor negative. Animal Metaphors in Social Use Since nearly four-fifths of Nage animal metaphors refer to human characteristics, behaviours, and the like, questions naturally arise as to how far such usages reflect features of Nage social life and values. In fact, many metaphors instance one or more general principles or themes of Nage society. In the last chapter, I demonstrated how animal metaphors are often synonymous or at least very similar in meaning to one or more others. Pairs or clusters of synonymous metaphors necessarily express common social themes, but only in a relatively small measure do synonymous metaphors compose these themes. As mentioned in chapter 2, only a minority of animal metaphors refer to whole categories of people – for example, social statuses, the genders, age classes, or named populations. Exceptions include “ancient horns” (very old people), “Nage dog(s)” (Nage men in general), “cock” and “hen” (male and female infants), “young cock” (a young man whose voice is breaking), “young hen” (a prospective bride), “lost fowl” (deceased wife-takers), and “god’s chickens” (humans in general). In addition, “buffalo” and “dog” distinguish people of high and low rank, respectively (see Nos. 10, 20, 91), as somewhat less definitely do “Giant rat” and “mouse (or rat)” (Nos. 182, 184). Other metaphors with a collective human reference include “Kebi sheep,” “‘Ua goats,” “Geo cats,” and Réndu monkeys,” the first pair applying to all inhabitants of two regions, and the second pair more specifically to the men of those regions. To these one might add the numerous metaphors applied to young children whose behaviour adults find bothersome and the few that implicitly refer to people of low social standing. Nevertheless, the large

342

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 343

majority of Nage animal metaphors describe individuals with reference to often very specific features distinguishing them, mostly situationally and temporarily, from other people. The majority of such metaphors can be used for either men or women. Some 15 percent refer exclusively or primarily to one gender or the other, with the largest number (forty-four, or 10 percent of the total of 444) referring to men, and far fewer (twenty-three) referring to women. These figures do not provide the whole picture, as more detailed study would likely reveal a greater application of otherwise gender-neutral metaphors to one gender or the other as well as differences in the gender of speakers. Even so, it is noteworthy how the greater incidence of animal metaphors referring to males replicates the findings of Sommer and Sommer’s (2011) study of animal metaphors employed by American students. Writing on South American animal metaphors, Gary Urton (1985) similarly remarks how the majority of these, including macaws among the Bororo, “overwhelmingly” apply specifically to men. On the other hand, the representations of which Urton speaks, it is important to note, are generally not conventional metaphors but “metaphor” in an extended, structuralist sense (see chapter 2). Whether the usages are sex-specific or not, several factors affect the incidence of Nage men applying metaphors to women or vice versa, particularly in direct address. For one thing, males may properly use expressions considered coarse, especially ones relating to sexual activity, only in the presence of marriageable females, notably matrilateral cross-cousins and other women of the category li ana, and brothers’ wives (ipa). Both relationships allow, even encourage, special licence in interpersonal dealings. An exception to this may be the genre named pata néke (see chapter 2), where male and female singers not specifically related in these ways direct sexually suggestive metaphors (e.g., No. 234, concerning masturbating monkeys) to all members of the opposite gender – especially since address in pata néke is collective rather than individual, so that potentially offensive language need not be taken personally. Nevertheless, when I brought this up, Nage insisted that, in this context too, a man should not employ sexually suggestive metaphors except when addressing women who are unrelated, or who could be married or engaged in a sexual relationship. Whatever the case, the Nage corpus does not bear out Goatly’s (2006, 28) observation that “sex specific pejorative metaphors” tend to refer to females, a claim the author illustrates entirely with English usages. And in

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

343

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 344

this respect it is noteworthy that several Nage metaphors employing female animals as vehicles (e.g., Nos. 18, 69, 272, 273) can be applied to men as well as women and that one (No. 271) refers to men exclusively. Of the 444 animal metaphors applying to humans, I count sixty (or 13.5 percent) that refer to physical features or conditions – mostly facial or bodily appearance but also vocal characteristics and, in one instance, body odour (“smelling like a shrew,” No. 199). Accordingly, nearly nine in ten refer to human behaviours, actions, characters, or circumstances. Among those pertaining to physical attributes, only two – “fine stallion” (denoting a handsome man) and “face like a junglefowl cock” (referring to a striking or animated male face) – are positive. Curiously perhaps, with the arguable exception of “hair that looks like it has been licked by a snake” (No. 419), none refers to an attractive woman – described literally as a “good, fine woman” (bu’e modhe). Many other metaphors describing physical appearance are neutral, not clearly expressing either approval or disapproval, but as accords with the finding for Nage metaphors in general, the majority can be classified as negative. A distinction of a different sort concerns several uncomplimentary usages advertising human physical traits that appear purely notional. For example, describing a man as “having only one testicle like a male rat” (No. 180) does not require a perception or conviction that the referent really is a monorchid. Nor for that matter does it definitely entail a view of male rats as typically exhibiting this condition (Forth 2016, 259). In a similar vein, accusing someone of having a face like a monkey (No. 211) or looking like a cat gripping a chicken in its mouth (No. 149) are intended less as factual assessments of people’s appearance than as expressions of the speaker’s feelings about the addressee. As discussed in individual commentaries, such expressions are mostly employed in more or less friendly banter, especially among men. But this is not to suggest that Nage do not similarly employ metaphors that appear better grounded in observation – for example, when teasing someone about having a large belly (like a Giant rat’s or a pregnant mare), a raucous laugh (like the harsh cry of a dollarbird), or large buttocks (like a tree ant). At the same time, and unlike the foregoing examples, many metaphors of this sort – whether used to convey disapproval or serving a largely descriptive end – refer not to a more or less permanent physical feature but describe a situational disposition or condition. Instances include describing someone bending over to lift a heavy object as “having a waist like a dog shitting” (No.

344

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 345

109), a person with a covered head as looking like “a large owl” (No. 389), or someone who is out of breath as “a goby (fish) in shallow water” (No. 465). Of metaphors referring to humans behaving in specific ways or finding themselves in particular circumstances – thus by far the majority – most suggest one or more of a series of social and moral themes. Communicating either disapproval or (in a far smaller number of instances) approval of the trait or condition in question, some of these themes are quite expectable as they express values most human societies are likely to hold – for instance, disapproval of dishonesty, duplicity, or deceit (three similar attributes I treat together); disobedience and insubordination; undue aggressiveness or pugnacity; and actions considered ill-mannered or coarse. Other metaphors, however, are rather more interesting since, by virtue of their associated themes and the number of usages reflecting a theme, they suggest special social concerns bound up with more specific features of Nage social life. Sexuality might be thought a thoroughly expectable human concern. Nevertheless it is worth noting that at least forty usages refer to undesirable sexual proclivities or relationships – for example, calling a man a “Nage dog” or a “crocodile” or describing him as a “ram striking everything with its horns,” or calling a woman or man a “hen that lays eggs in various places.” Sexual metaphors are, of course, also typical of the genre named pata néke, where men and women in turn tease or deride members of the opposite gender. Among the forty sexual metaphors are several that more specifically concern illicit unions or misconduct by marriage partners; examples include Nos. 10, 51, 55, 56, 87, 91, 178, 499, 502, and 509. Not always relating to sex or marriage, another cluster of metaphors, some half a dozen or so, concern exceptional and largely disapproved relations among kin. Among these are usages advertising excessive emotional attachment of parents to children (No. 14) or of children to parents (No. 466), and the undesirable conditions of being an only child (No. 361), a child of unknown paternity (No. 448), or a person with few kin (No. 514). Somewhat contrary to expectation, Nage appear to have no animal metaphors for orphans, nor in regard to sex and marriage, any pertaining to rape or, exclusively, to adultery. Incest in a broad sense is covered by metaphors employing the monitor lizard and the crocodile (Nos. 445, 486). Nage society is organized into kin groups that, at various levels of segmentation, act corporately (especially in respect to land tenure), require mutual assistance between members, and further operate as units of marriage

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

345

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 346

exchange and affinal alliance. Therefore it is hardly surprising that a number of metaphors refer to attitudes or behaviours that either promote or disrupt or fail to maintain group unity and solidarity. Two usages contrast buffalo dung (No. 6) and goat droppings (No. 70) as references to group unity and disunity, respectively, while another two (Nos. 205, 209) similarly express disapproval of groups that fail to hold together when confronting a common adversary or adversity. Exemplified by “buffalo that wrecks its enclosure” (No. 13), “cat biting its own tail” (No. 145), and two rat metaphors (Nos. 186, 187), another four expressions more specifically refer to people who cause trouble within their own group, and yet another – “frog of two rivers” (No. 479) – describes someone with divided loyalties. As some of these usages reveal, Nage often speak of social groups, and especially kin or descent groups, as spatial entities and, more specifically, as houses. “House” (sa’o) can therefore denote a lineage or a unit of affinal alliance, and, in the same vein, “big house, long gallery” (sa’o méze, téda léwa) describes a more inclusive group of relatives. In itself metaphoric and indeed instancing a cross-culturally widespread conceptual metaphor, this identification further illuminates animal metaphors expressing disapproval of people who fail to maintain a single, stable residence; who change residence unnecessarily; and who move about in an irregular or disorderly manner. Symptomatic of a value of general and quite distinctive import for the constitution of Nage society, over a dozen metaphors attest to these closely linked themes. Among these are usages expressing disapproval of a wandering, unrestrained lifestyle, three of which employ the horse as the vehicle (Nos. 36, 46, 50) – presumably because, in contrast to other animals, horses can be and should be trained to behave in an orderly way. On the other hand, two usages referring to unreliable or unpredictable people (Nos. 87, 103), in one instance a wife, use the dog, another trainable animal, as their vehicle. Further examples describe excessively mobile people as “monkeys jumping from tree to tree” (No. 223), and a man who moves around a lot and is therefore difficult to locate as a “wild pig” (No. 134) – a usage also connoting irregular sexuality (see “child of a wild pig,” No. 120). Other metaphors of this general sort employ the irregular egg-laying habits of certain hens (Nos. 272–4) or contrast porcupines and junglefowl (Nos. 172, 367) as creatures which, respectively, occupy permanent dens and do not maintain regular roosting sites. Another calls on the dolphin (No. 463) to characterize a person who is given to disap-

346

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 347

pearing and suddenly reappearing or whose presence in a place is irregular. And yet another compares people who, indecisively, move their family several times before finally settling down to a “cat that moves its kittens” (No. 151). In several respects Nage also conceive of a marriage, a union sanctioned by the payment of bridewealth, as a house. Accordingly, partners in extramarital liaisons are depicted as “goats in undergrowth” and “pigs rooting in vines” (Nos. 71, 129) – thus animals engaged in animal behaviour in places outside of settlements and certainly outside of houses. After a marriage is fully transacted, a woman typically moves to her husband’s village, where she should remain, returning to the house of her parents only on special occasions when she formally visits as a member of her husband’s group, thus as a “wife-taker.” Metaphors expressing disapproval of behaviour contravening this norm are “dog from Labo” (No. 87) and “wasp piercing vegetables” (No. 499), while virtually the same wasp metaphor condemns an inconstant male suitor who “flits” from one prospective wife to another (No. 502). By no means are married couples always expected to have a house of their own, at least not in the early days of their marriage, and many live for a number of years in extended family households, usually the husband’s. Even so, Nage generally hold in low regard people who reside in the houses of unrelated people or distant kin, describing them as “chickens without a coop” (No. 265). Before the introduction of wet rice cultivation, the Nage economy was based largely on swiddening, which involved regularly abandoning fields and opening new ones. Nevertheless, maintaining permanent villages (bo’a) with permanent houses, where major rituals were performed and graves were laid, was and remains fundamental to Nage identity. Accordingly, the village is the centre of social and traditional religious life, even though villagers’ fields are often located some considerable distance away, and it is in this context that Nage employ “crocodile of the lower regions” (No. 487) as a pejorative reference to people who rarely leave their fields, spend little time in their villages, and are rarely involved in and contribute little to community affairs. Revealing much the same concern are metaphors describing people who rarely leave their houses or appear in public (“civet inside a palm trunk” and “grub sniffing its own arse,” Nos. 202, 543) and expressions referring to people who insufficiently participate in group discussions (“dove looking at a pool of water,” No. 401; and “cockroach on the edge of a plate,” No. 532; see also “turtle that turns its head from side to side,” No. 490). How far the first two

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

347

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 348

metaphors imply lack of participation specifically in the life of a larger group is somewhat unclear. Nevertheless, all can be construed as advertising a more general failure to engage with others. As significant as their concern with “staying in place” – and maintaining relations with people equally associated with one’s place – is the value Nage put on what anthropologists call “generalized reciprocity,” an uncalculating give and take expected of members of the same social group. This finds expression in a series of metaphors, about ten in all, referring to indolence or shiftlessness, avoiding work, and relying on other people’s generosity. Instances include “Channel-billed cuckoo” (a bird parasitic on crows, No. 255), “coucal with a rotten anus” (No. 310), “snake in an orchard” (No. 422), “monitor lizard collecting ants” (No. 441), “tadpole feeding on dirt” (No. 484) and “praying mantis on top of a cotton blossom” (No. 498). At first glance, the number of such metaphors might suggest something like a tropical Protestant ethic. But, unlike some Westerners, Nage do not view industry as an end in itself; rather, they simply require people to work in order to support themselves and their families and to contribute to collective efforts – for example, by lending agricultural assistance to kin and neighbours and providing for group rituals. Also consistent with a value on reciprocity and mutual assistance are another dozen or more metaphors expressing disapproval of greed, including expressions that refer more specifically to insufficient reticence or excessive eagerness when food is offered (e.g., “horse that dances to the drum” No. 41; “bronzeback (snake) whose tail alone remains” No. 436), and several usages describing stinginess (“small wasp (and) fig sap,” No. 501), unwillingness to share (“buffalo that blocks the wallow,” No. 12), and ingratitude or, more specifically, treating badly someone whose generosity one enjoys (“stick horse, dog adept at climbing,” Nos. 49, 85; “Giant rat’s belly,” No. 179). Equally relevant are several metaphors expressing disapproval of people who too freely do what others tell them or give in to requests – thereby using up resources that should be expended on one’s family or meeting the demands of others (such as affines) to whom one is more definitely obligated (see “horse with a soft neck,” No. 47; “dog tame with everyone,” No. 98; “neck like a banana beetle,” No. 522) – as well as metaphors referring to wastefulness or profligacy (“cockatoos and crows,” No. 307) and unrewarded effort (Nos. 256 and 382, incorporating the Channel-billed cuckoo and the koel).

348

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 349

On the positive side, the value on reciprocity and helping others is further attested in metaphors referring approvingly to people who are generous or especially helpful (“horse that accepts a large rice container,” No. 39), willing to share (Nos. 318, 340, employing the drongo and friarbird), and considerate of their fellows (“frogs have livers, crayfish have bellies,” Nos. 481, 550). Possibly also belonging here is “mouse taking care of a Giant rat” (No. 183), though this can alternatively be counted as one more metaphor implying excessive or unnecessary generosity, specifically towards outsiders. Although conceivably connected with the foregoing, an otherwise separate series of metaphors, as many as fourteen, concerns performing tasks improperly. Some simply refer to doing something inefficiently or ineffectually, like “buffalo carrying vines on its head” (No. 4); “monkey carrying a gourd,” (No. 222); “monkey roasting a crayfish,” (No. 224); and “cockroach slamming into a spider’s web” (No. 533). Others express disapproval of people who work inconsistently – not seeing a task through to completion or stopping one thing and beginning another and thereby “mixing tasks.” An obvious example is our eponymous metaphor concerning the urinating dog (No. 93). Others include “rat with a broken placenta” (No. 188), “fly alighting on sores” (No. 516), and, in part, “rat without an escape hole” (No. 189) and “earthworm unable to re-enter the earth” (No. 561). This somewhat distinctive theme warrants further comment, since it suggests a quite specific cultural value. In various contexts, Nage require linked tasks that make up a project, such as building a house or laying a field, to be conducted in a regular sequence and carried through to completion before beginning another – thus quite contrary to the modern Western value on “multitasking” (a concept and practice that has recently received extensive attention in the psychological literature; see, e.g., Salvucci and Taatgen 2011).1 The same principle can be discerned in metaphors critically describing people who change their mind (“mouse turned into a Giant rat,” No. 184; “cockatoo’s wings,” No. 306) or who proceed in an irregular manner with quick changes of direction (“tiny bat,” No. 248; see also No. 332, “fantail does not want to agree,” denoting a fickle woman). And equally illustrative are metaphors expressing disapproval of speakers who jump from topic to topic, like “a monkey leaping from tree to tree” (No. 223), or suddenly change topics, like “a drongo’s broken tail” (No. 317). At the same time, this last pair of metaphors can be counted among a group of over twenty that focus on a more general theme of speaking improperly –

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

349

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 350

which is to say, in a disorderly, excessive, incoherent, untrustworthy, or harmful way. Instances include “butting of female goats” (No. 69), referring to thoughtless speech likely to have negative consequences; “goat on one hill, dog on another” (Nos. 75, 92), describing people who speak at cross-purposes; “dog that jumps on coconut dregs” (No. 95), referring to someone who misinterprets what is being said; “shrew” (No. 197), denoting a gossip; “tongue of a bronzeback snake” (No. 435), describing a smooth talker; “bees inside a nest” (No. 512) and “calling frogs” (No. 480), both referring to people who speak incoherently or noisily; and “dung beetle informs the earthquake” (No. 520), meaning a bearer of false news. In addition, several expressions employing the monkey and another incorporating the mysterious “you fowl” identify people who make false or hypocritical accusations (see Nos. 171, 176, 225, 283). While such metaphors might be expected to draw on vocal characteristics of the zoological vehicle, the majority, interestingly enough, are motivated instead by other physical qualities of the animals concerned. Other themes are more specific still but nonetheless suggest similarly general concerns. As many as ten metaphors describe bodily uncleanliness or personal untidiness. To refer to dirty or messy people, Nage thus speak of a “buffalo defecating as it moves” (No. 5), “sheep’s diarrhea” (No. 66), “cat’s face” (No. 152), “smelling like a shrew” (No. 199), “civet covering its droppings” (No. 201), “sheep’s placenta” (No. 67), and “chicken with feathered legs” (No. 264), the last two expressions referring to people who wear ill-fitting or excessive clothing. Three other metaphors of this sort have the monkey as their vehicle (see Nos. 212, 214, 215), thereby suggesting the monkey’s morphological resemblance to humans as part of the motivation. This concern with cleanliness may seem curious. Nage nowadays bathe regularly and otherwise keep clean, though what they say about the past implies that this was less true of people in former times, partly because of greater difficulty in gaining access to water. On the other hand, difficulty keeping clean and tidy does not mean that people will not aspire to do so, and in any case lack of cleanliness is always relative and often a question of perception. Employing goats, dogs, monkeys, rats, and insect larvae, another six metaphors describe people who are restive or who fidget (see Nos. 80, 94, 192, 238, 541, 545), a concern not implausibly connected with Nage disapproval of people who do not maintain a permanent residence and so display a more general spatial instability (see “scampering rat,” No. 192, which subsumes both meanings). All of the six can be applied to adults and so are partly dis-

350

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 351

tinguished from the larger series of usages, a dozen in all, which refers to annoying children who, by way of boisterous, rowdy, or otherwise bothersome behaviour, invoke the ire of adults. Like most people, Nage are generally fond of young children and, by Western standards at least, can even appear indulgent. On the other hand, because many adult activities, including relatively public events to which kin and neighbours are invited, take place inside houses – where of course people also care for children – youngsters and their demands often interfere with the conduct of these activities, as they can with adult attempts simply to get on with chores or rest and relax. Yet only rarely do Nage actively discipline children – with corporal punishment or removal, or even with direct reprimands. Instead, they voice criticism and complaints that often appear more to perform a cathartic function than to have a discernable effect on the behaviour of the children, and it is here that animal metaphors play a major part. While four usages expressing exasperation at children’s misbehaviour employ mammals – specifically goats, dogs, pigs, and monkeys (see Nos. 72, 80, 104, 127, 235) – the vehicles in most cases are biting insects or arachnids. It is an easy inference that it is both the physical discomfort they cause and the creatures’ small size that motivates their association with bothersome children. At the same time, all these metaphors may owe something to the connection revealed in other Nage usages (see chapter 1) between children and animals in general. In accordance with the far lower number of positive metaphors, positive themes do not form sizeable clusters to the extent that do negative expressions. Exceptions are the previously mentioned series referring to people who are helpful and considerate and the several metaphors alluding to social unity or solidarity. Another group comprises six metaphors, mostly employed when ritually addressing benevolent spirits, which express a desire for prolificity in humans and livestock, and whose vehicles include pigs, chickens, junglefowl, quails, fish fry, and ants (see Nos. 123, 270, 369, 396, 469, 510). A dozen or more metaphors describe people with exceptional skills or other admired qualities. But these are quite various and include expressions describing physical strength or exceptional energy (“veins of a friarbird,” No. 345), agility and manual skill (“hands and arms like a monkey,” No. 216; and “hands like a gecko,” No. 455), sturdiness and toughness (“flying fox’s elbow,” No. 244), a fine singing voice (“wailing civet,” No. 207), skill in speaking (“bronzeback’s tongue,” No. 435), and speed (“bronzeback,” No. 434). Others refer to personal good fortune (“friarbird,” No. 338) and qualities of persistence (two gecko

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

351

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 352

metaphors, Nos. 451, 457), boldness (Nos. 126, 553, incorporating the pig and a crayfish), dominance (Nos. 430, 440, employing two kinds of snakes), obedience (a horse metaphor, No. 44), and honesty (“straight like a civet’s tail,” No. 206). In contrast to their vehicles, which often describe animals behaving in quite specific ways, human referents of most Nage animal metaphors do not concern people engaged in specific tasks but are, instead, applicable to human activity in any number of contexts. An interesting exception is the annual pugilistic competitions called etu, to which I have necessarily referred in individual commentaries. Six metaphors (Nos. 17, 148, 306, 337, , 500, 551) relate to men engaged in etu. However, in only one, “cat from Geo” (No. 148), is this activity the exclusive context, whereas the others are more generally applied. “Dove droppings” (No. 408) might be counted as an additional instance, but this refers to an artefact rather than to a behaviour. Even so, the pugilistic referents were all mentioned by Nage commentators, and most if not all seem to have a special relevance for talking about these competitions. The Social Efficacy of Animal Metaphors Animal metaphors should not be expected to reflect every aspect of a society. Some will be reflected instead in different sorts of metaphors (plant metaphors, metaphors employing inanimate objects) while others may find no metaphorical expression at all. Still, Nage animal metaphors offer insight into a fairly wide range of values, principles, interests, and common concerns, and to that extent provide a fuller understanding of Nage society and culture – not to mention their knowledge of and relations with non-human animals (a matter discussed throughout Forth 2016). Quite another sort of question concerns the operation of animal metaphors in face-to-face relations and everyday social intercourse. Exemplified by metaphors appearing in proverbs, some usages serve a didactic or corrective purpose, and their content is typically positive or neutral, approvingly describing how things are or should be. The same is true of metaphors more simply referring to individuals displaying qualities that are generally admired, as when someone is described as especially helpful or skilled in some way. Of course, the majority of expressions incorporating animal metaphors, which have a decidedly negative import, can also serve a didactic function, although their main use is to voice disapproval of particular individuals. Obviously such criticism will have most

352

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 353

impact when uttered in direct address. But this is not to argue that Nage employ negative metaphors (or positive ones for that matter) in an entirely calculated way. For many are used in anger or when annoyed, and, as noted earlier, some appear to function cathartically for speakers rather than informatively or correctively for others. Nevertheless, it can be presumed that the use of animal metaphors serves to express and, in some measure, maintain and reinforce social values by advertising qualities that Nage consider good or (in the majority of instances) those they regard as bad. But this leaves the question of whether animal metaphors are more effective in this respect than are either other sorts of metaphors or literal language. This is a very large topic to which I cannot possibly expect to do full justice. However, taking cues from Nage usage, several observations can be registered. With negative metaphors, referring to someone as an animal or displaying attributes resembling an animal’s might seem all the more offensive insofar as this implies that the referent is not a human being or not fully human. On the other hand, since Nage (and one assumes other people as well) understand conventional metaphors figuratively, and thus as not really asserting that a person is an animal, then to that extent they could be received as a milder and, by virtue of their very conventionality, more acceptable way of expressing criticism – less severe than any literal, extemporary, and more pointed disapprobation. Nevertheless, the negative attribute is still contained in the metaphor’s interpretation, even though, in the Nage idiom, it is somewhat “covered up” or “disguised” (péle) by the animal vehicle. And to that extent the negative force of the metaphor is real enough. Otherwise expressed, the identification of a person with a non-human animal is preserved despite the recognized figurative character of the expression. Thus, whereas the “unreal” character of the metaphorical equation allows the expression – and the disapprobation to which it gives voice – not to be taken completely seriously or accepted in full measure, the interpretation of the metaphor (of which people should generally be aware) ensures its efficacy. This ambiguity of metaphor, and in the present case specifically animal metaphors, is further connected with another feature of such expressions – namely, their humorous character. This often became apparent when observing animal metaphors in use or when talking to people about particular expressions. Of course, not all animal metaphors are found amusing (positive metaphors usually are not) but many are, including a good number that refer

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

353

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 354

to human qualities deemed either mildly or seriously negative. Like puns and other rhetorical devices that identify different senses of a single word or phrase, metaphors, and perhaps especially metaphors linking animals and humans, confuse categorical distinctions and identify things that are normally separated, and it would appear to be mainly for this reason that they are commonly found to be humorous. However, humour evoked by animal metaphors can be seen not only as a function of their figurative character (itself the source of their ambiguity) but also as a factor augmenting recognition of their figurativeness and so similarly modifying their negative import. The combination may then make unfavourable evaluations that critical metaphors convey easier to take emotionally and more acceptable intellectually, even while the implicit criticism is understood and possibly accepted. If these remarks apply less to metaphors designating positive human qualities, the difference is obviously attributable to the fact that qualities of the animal, whether explicit in the expression or merely implicit, are ones people admire or to which they aspire. After all, not only Nage but people in general recognize that, in regard to many qualities (including their strength, speed, and endurance), animals are superior to humans, notwithstanding any general assessment of humans as, on the whole, superior to animals or as superior in other respects. As regards European perspectives, moreover, it is worth noting that, despite ubiquitous citations of Descartes as typifying a Western view of animals as unthinking and unfeeling automata – a rhetorical strategy especially favoured, it seems, by neo-animists and ontological pluralists – earlier and more recent philosophers from Montaigne to Midgley (2002) have taken quite the opposite position,2 as among natural scientists did Darwin (1872) in his ground-breaking demonstration of the continuity between humans and animals in regard to emotion and the expression of the emotions. From the manifestly positive value of certain qualities of animals, it therefore follows that a Nage man described, for example, as “a fine stallion” – meaning physically attractive and well turned out – will simply take this as a compliment. And owing to the typical specificity of animal metaphors, it further follows that he will not consider the characterization as implying that he has a face like a horse or eats like a horse (see “horse with its bridle removed,” No. 48). Of course, for the metaphor to work in the way intended, its conventional interpretation must be understood, and if it were not, then calling someone a horse, even a fine horse, could well be taken negatively.

354

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 355

Anthropomorphism, Animism, and Ontological Pluralism In a more general frame, how statements referring to someone as an animal are understood should depend on a particular view of relations between humans and animals. In a society in which non-human animals are considered fundamentally similar to humans, equal to humans, or even as types of humans, animal metaphors might function quite differently from what one finds among Westerners – and by all indications among Nage as well. But it does not follow that, in such a society, animal metaphors could never express disapproval or otherwise be used negatively. For if it is assumed that people the world over regard humans and the various animals with which they are familiar as belonging, at some level, to separate categories, then describing people as acting like any kind of animal, for example, would still entail their behaving like something they are not. In that case, one might imagine animal metaphors in our hypothetical society as a variety of “human metaphors,” usages describing people as occupying social categories to which they do not belong – as when a pampered girl is called a “princess” or someone not employed by a circus is derisively labelled a “clown.” But how one might detect any such ontological or epistemological difference in a society’s animal metaphors is quite another matter. Conventional animal metaphors are, before all else, standard statements regularly uttered in natural languages. Yet simply from the form of a statement it is not possible to discern the relation imagined by speakers between the animal vehicle and any human referent, or indeed whether an utterance is intended metaphorically at all. Thus the statement “Sadie is a dog” could be an uncomplimentary metaphorical reference to a human female or, alternatively, a literal statement of fact (referring, for example, to a small terrier once owned by my parents). What is more, a metaphor of exactly the same form can have different meanings in different speech communities. To cite one illustration, an Aboriginal Australian referring to a person as a “crow” (meaning a member of a certain social group) is saying something quite different from an Afrikaans or Dutch-speaker making the same statement (and meaning, in the first instance, that the person is “slender,” and in the second that he or she is “spirited and quick witted,” Dirven 1994, 74). Quite apart from the fact that the bird name in the three instances will refer to slightly different ornithological species, it might be objected that, in the first case,

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

355

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 356

the speaker is not using a conventional metaphor at all but either is not speaking metaphorically or is doing so only in the sense employed by Lévi-Strauss in his interpretation of totemism. Be that as it may, both in the Australian and European examples a human is verbally identified as an animal, and an animal of roughly the same sort, while in each case the statement conveys a different meaning and reflects a different motivation – and in the Australian case, presumably manifests a different view of relations between animals and humans in general. Where the metaphorical import of a statement can be established – from local commentary or from observing contexts of its use – animal metaphors applied to human beings are obvious instances of zoomorphism, speaking of people as animals or as like animals. Conventional metaphors of any sort are also invariably asymmetric, so that whereas Nage employ “urinating dog …” to describe people who prosecute a task inconsistently or without following through to the end, they never speak of dogs urinating as “inconsistent people.” In the same way, anglophones may characterize a despicable person as a “rat” but never describe a rat as a “despicable person.” On the other hand, they may conceive (although not usually speak) of rats as despicable animals. As this suggests, despite the asymmetry of conventional animal metaphors, zoomorphism implies its opposite, that is, anthropomorphism or, more specifically, an implicit personification (Kövecses 2010, 39) of animals – a view consistent with “interactionist” theories of metaphor most closely associated with Max Black (1962). Supporting this approach, one could then argue that calling a person a dog, for example, is possible only to the extent that dogs display traits and behaviours that are recognized as in some way similar to those that can be observed in humans. A review of the Nage corpus may suggest that different animal metaphors incorporate anthropomorphism in different ways or to varying degrees. An agile man described as having the “hands” of a Tokay gecko (No. 455) is someone whose hands and arms possess a degree of skill, especially in climbing and grasping, comparable to that found in the limbs of the lizard. Speaking of an inconsistent worker as a “dog pissing at the edge of a path” is different, insofar as the dog’s act of urination, something obviously natural to dogs, is not identified with the way (some) humans urinate but rather with a disapproved manner of discharging any variety of humans tasks, most and perhaps all of which a dog would be incapable of carrying out. Nevertheless, in both of these examples what is attributed to the animal vehicle – limbs in one case

356

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 357

corresponding to the limbs of the human referent, and in the other the capacity to urinate (though identified with quite different human behaviours) – is something that the animal palpably possesses or of which it is capable. In contrast, other metaphors apparently attribute to an animal qualities or actions that are normally ascribed only to humans (in part because most implicitly require linguistic ability). Thus, Nage speak of a monkey “scolding” a pig (No. 225) and “accusing” porcupines and Giant rats (Nos. 171, 176), a monkey “roasting” crayfish (No. 224), a mouse “mocking” a Giant rat (No. 182), a monitor lizard “tricking” ants, crustacean larvae doing the same to smaller fish fry (Nos. 442, 560), the friarbird “ordering, reserving” the sun (No. 350), and swallows “commanding” the months (No. 413). Similarly, another three metaphors (see Nos. 86, 430, 534) imply that the animals named possess “mind” (ngai zede) or “(force of) character, masterfulness” (waka), or “thoughts” and “feelings” (ate, literally “liver,” and tuka, literally “belly,” see No. 481). The fact is, however, that all of these actions, qualities, and properties are things that Nage do indeed ordinarily regard as exclusively human, so that none supports an interpretation of their animal metaphors implying a closer identity of humans and animals, as a general property of thought, any more than do, say, English animal metaphors. Not only do Nage understand metaphors depicting one animal “accusing” or “mocking” another animal as being as figurative as the animal names in relation to their non-animal referents, but comparable metaphors also occur in English. One thinks, for example, of “sedulous” apes, foxes being “charged with guarding” henhouses, “poor” church mice, “happy” clams, wolves “wearing” sheep’s “clothing,” dogs “lying (speaking falsely),” and “drunk” skunks.3 In addition, Nage metaphors describing animals as possessing human attributes of “mind” or “character” should be understood as referring more to qualities of their human referents than the animal vehicles – just as in English, describing someone as having the “manners of a pig” does not require any notion that pigs actually have manners. In fact, the point of this last expression is precisely that they do not. However interesting these comparisons may be, reviewing indications of anthropomorphism in individual metaphors only takes us so far in exploring how speaking of humans as animals may reflect cross-cultural differences in conceptions of relations between the two categories. Typically rejecting any concept of anthropomorphism, portrayed as a distinctively Western notion

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

357

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 358

that compromises a proper understanding of non-Western views of the world, a very different approach is suggested by several perspectives that have been brought together under the heading of the “ontological turn,” or what is more conveniently called “ontological pluralism.” Within this camp, a division is found between writers who characterize different societies as employing different “ontologies” (e.g., Descola 2013) – fundamentally different understandings of what sort of things exist in the world and how they are related – and others who propose a methodological (and quite explicitly political) use of ethnography to develop new concepts and new ways of interpreting and understanding human beings that would, in effect, replace what proponents view as a specifically Western (or “Cartesian”) philosophy that, when applied to non-Westerners, necessarily distorts its subject (Holbraad and Pedersen 2017, 14–17). Nevertheless, both approaches entail a view that non-Western societies, or some of these, conceive of a relation between humans and non-human animals that is radically different from what is found in Western thought. Indeed, hypothetical differences in ways people think about animals, specifically, have played a very large part in the “ontological turn,” as shown especially by the work of Descola (2013) and Viveiros de Castro (e.g., 1998, 2014). Although Descola has constructed a model of four different ontologies, the fundamental opposition in his theoretical scheme, as in the writings of other pluralists (e.g., Ingold), is between “naturalism,” characterized as a distinctly Western ontology, and “animism,” a deliberate redeployment of the term E.B. Tylor (1866, 1958) applied to any understanding of the world that attributes “life” and “souls” not just to all animate beings but to inanimate things as well. Where discernible in a more conventional anthropology, “naturalism” is criticized for depicting the ideas of others – and especially ideas inconsistent with or unsupported by modern science – as “representations,” specifically in the sense of mental processes whereby one thing (a category, image) “replaces” or “stands for” another, in the service of thought as well as for purposes of expression or communication. It is quite obvious how the usual treatment of metaphor, particularly by linguists, would fall within this latter frame. And it is for this reason that ontological pluralists, like Ingold (see chapter 2), Viveiros de Castro (see especially Viveiros de Castro 2004, 13–16), and Descola, reject “metaphor” (implicitly including conventional metaphor) and by the same token anthropomorphism as well – as an inadequate or inaccurate way of comprehending non-Western conceptions of

358

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 359

relations between humans and, among other things, animals. Accordingly, pluralists, and most notably Viveiros de Castro in his development of a theoretical model called “perspectivism,” speak of non-Westerners not as “representing” animals in a certain way but, instead, of their conceiving of no essential difference between animals and people, and furthermore, of nonhuman animals as “seeing” themselves as people and humans as animals (Viveiros de Castro 2014, 56–7). In the same vein, pluralists reject the standard anthropological contrast of “nature” and “culture” (or “nature” and “society”), specifically as this has been applied in “naturalist” interpretations of various ethnographically documented “beliefs” or “representations” – that is, ways of speaking – and practices from which these might be inferred, as “cultural” or “social” constructions of a pre-existing “natural” reality. Rather, in animist ontology, Viveiros de Castro claims, one finds not “multiculturalism” coexisting with a single nature but instead “multinaturalism” combined with a single culture shared by humans and non-humans alike. As previously indicated (in chapter 2; see also Forth 2016; Forth 2018b), Nage ethnography provides very little evidence for ontological animism or for either of the other two “non-naturalist” ontologies (“totemism” and “analogism”) identified by Descola. This much should be sufficiently indicated by earlier remarks on how Nage view animals as lacking culture, but it might also be noted that, whereas animists are described as attributing “souls,” personhood, and human-like perspectives on the world to non-human animals, Nage hold no such views, at least not as generally accepted or widely held propositions. A possible exception to this is the apparently “analogistic” identity Nage posit between humans and water buffalo owned by spirits. But, as shown in chapter 2, this idea is meaningful specifically in the context of sacrificial ritual and has no bearing on, and cognitively exists quite separately from, the various ways Nage speak of, and evidently think about, buffalo in the numerous buffalo metaphors reviewed in chapter 3. In fact, most relations Nage maintain in respect to animals, both conceptual and practical, point to an attitude of naturalism. Nevertheless, I would not want to classify Nage as fully fledged or exclusive “naturalists,” mainly because the four models Descola proposes appear not to identify separate “ontologies” but, instead, formal differences among ideas relating to animals and other non-human entities that can be found in any society – a possibility Descola himself partly concedes when he allows for ontological “slippage” (as when Europeans treat “their cat as though it had a soul,” Descola 2013, 233–4).

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

359

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 360

On these grounds alone, one should not expect Nage animal metaphors to reveal any unitary or pervasive ontology significantly different from any equally monolithic philosophy presumed to underlie animal metaphors employed by European-speakers. As already demonstrated, Nage regard their metaphors as figurative usages, a view consistent with their concept of metaphor as “covering speech.” By the same token, ethnographic conversations failed to reveal any notion that a person spoken of as an animal, or an animal displaying a specific behaviour, is a temporary or permanent transformation of that animal; is somehow possessed by the animal’s spirit (an entity in any case not recognized by Nage); or by his or her characteristics or actions reveals himself or herself as somehow “participating” (as Lévy-Bruhl might have had it) in the nature, character, or essence of the animal. As explained in chapter 2, Nage identifying themselves as “god’s chickens” entails no notion of a spiritual connection between chickens and people, and certainly not any belief that chickens too have souls in any way identical to the souls of humans. Something of this sort may be suggested by the Cuna of Panama (Howe 1977), who regard animals as once having been human, like people, but as having subsequently changed, so that Cuna metaphors describing people as being like animals can be seen to turn partly on this primordial ontological unity. But nothing comparable can be found either in Nage mythology or in what they say about animals at present. In addition, the Cuna believe that despite their primordial identity humans and animals “long ago … became fully differentiated” (45n8, 139); hence, as Howe makes clear, rhetorical statements linking animals and humans at present (which, he notes, are given a public interpretation by Cuna orators) must be understood, like comparable Nage usages, as conventional metaphors. If animists are supposed to see a continuity between animals and humans, a categorical unity applying to all animals at all times, then Nage animal metaphors reveal no more than specific and partial continuities between individual humans and particular animals displayed in observable similarities that, moreover, pertain most often not to permanent traits of character or appearance but to ways people present themselves to others temporarily and contextually. (Again, this contrast equally applies to Nage conventional metaphors and their proposition – which in some theoretical frameworks could be construed as “metaphor” in an extended sense – that humans simultaneously exist as spirit buffalo.) Of course, ontological pluralists do not deny that the people whose implicit or explicit ideas they adduce in support

360

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 361

of their theoretical schemes recognize that all animals manifestly differ from humans in their physical forms or habits. Rather, what they posit for nonWestern “animists” is an ontological attitude presupposing, specifically, a continuity of essence between humans and all non-humans or, in Viveiros de Castro’s formulation, something like a single culture. In a similar way, Descola describes animists as recognizing a resemblance of “interiority” (or nonmaterial essence) between humans and animals coexisting with a difference of “exteriority,” or manifest physical form. By contrast, naturalism presents the opposite configuration, combining a difference of interiority (only humans have “culture” or “souls”) with an exterior, or physical, resemblance (both humans and animals are composed of flesh and blood, and in a modern view humans are “naturally” a kind of animal).4 In view of these distinctions, Descola’s formulation, especially, facilitates a further assessment of the possible ontological implications of Nage animal metaphors, although one that hardly favours the pluralists. Conventional metaphor in Nage, or for that matter in any other language, appears to entail the inverse of animism: for, as an analysis of individual metaphors has revealed, these typically deal in exterior resemblances, selecting and foregrounding specific perceptible morphological and behavioural similarities between a given kind of animal and a specific human individual (or, less often, a collection of individuals). This formulation, it hardly needs remarking, straightforwardly corresponds to Descola’s model of “naturalism,” the diametric opposite of his “animism.” So if Nage had to be slotted into one ontological box or another, their animal metaphors would provide further grounds for characterizing this small-scale non-Western society of cultivators and hunters as “naturalists.” But to make this case within a scheme like Descola’s, one would further need to show that nothing like conventional metaphor exists among animists – or at least that, insofar as usages like describing a person as a urinating dog might be employed by people classified as animists, their animistic users understand these expressions very differently. Although not explicitly addressing the concept of conventional metaphor, Descola (2013, 251) actually appears to make such a case when he asserts: “in animist societies there are no examples in which the relations between human beings are specified by expressions that denote relations among nonhumans” (emphasis added). Evidently, this would include relations between animals (e.g., Nage “monkey roasting a crayfish”) or between animals and inanimate objects (“Pit viper waiting for the stick”). An exception he allows are “rare

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

361

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 362

cases in which the two types of relations coincide perfectly because of the similarity of the actions that they involve” (ibid., emphasis added), exemplified by usages in which terms that “evoke the behaviour of predatory animals” are employed for (human) warfare. Despite the disparity between “perfect coincidence” and “similarity” in this statement, what Descola seems to be arguing is that, where animists do speak of human actions with terms referring to animal actions (those “rare cases”), the actions are essentially the same or similar and, therefore, are to be understood not as metaphors but as literal propositions (as would obtain, for example, when anglophones describe both humans and animals as “eating,” “sleeping,” “urinating,” and so on). A similar approach is evident in other passages. Descola (2013, 250) interprets animists as conceiving of relations between “non- humans” and between humans and non-humans on the “model of human society,” and as “qualifying” (apparently meaning “describing”) these relations with “categories borrowed from the field of relations between humans” (emphasis added). Responding to Ingold’s criticism of this position (summarized in chapter 2), Descola then asserts that this animist conception “does not in any sense stem from metaphorical projection” – and that it does not do so specifically because such an understanding, either the animists’ or his own, would “lead back to a distinction of nature and society that is alien to local practices” (ibid.). Rather, he declares, in animist societies “social categories serve simply as handy labels to characterize a relationship, regardless of the ontological status of the terms that it links together” (250–1). If “label” here simply substitutes for “metaphor” (apparently sometimes subsuming the “ontological metaphors” of linguists, see Kövecses 2010), earlier in his book Descola (2013, 10) makes the same use of “model” – as when he speaks of a “common model” enabling the use of “named categories” that “represent some relations between humans on the model of symbiotic relations between other species” (emphasis added). Evidently, then, animists do sometimes engage in “representation,” though it should perhaps be recalled that Descola claims that this sort of representation is “rarer” than is using terms for human relations to describe “interactions between nonhumans.” The impression conveyed by this tendentious argument is that animists cannot employ animal metaphors by definition, and that in those “rare” cases where they appear to do so, these are not metaphors at all but merely convenient ways of speaking – whatever might be made of this distinction. Con-

362

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 363

versely, it seems, when “naturists” express views that suggest animist thinking, these can only be understood as “poetic licence” and “metaphor,” as when a Euro-American ecologist’s argument that “non-humans” possess an “awareness of a future” (Leopold 1987)5 is dismissed by Descola (2013, 196) as “nothing but a metaphor for the general teleonomy of nature.” By this point readers should be able to judge for themselves whether or not Nage metaphors describing animal behaviours (including animal actions involving other animals, human beings, or objects), and for the most part referring to humans, are simply to be understood as “handy labels.” As the size of the corpus attests, such expressions are anything but rare. As already shown, there is no evidence to support an understanding of Nage conventional animal metaphors as reflecting or composing an “animist” ontology. Taking a more positive view, it may be recalled how Nage animal metaphors prospectively equate any human being with animals of most kinds recognized by Nage, so that properties of animals are spoken of and presumably thought about as resembling those of humans. However, not only is this observation virtually tautological, but it surely applies to metaphors in English and other Western languages as much as it does to Nage. Especially if we can imagine conventional metaphors as, at some level, not being understood figuratively (“yes, I really do mean that John [a greedy or slovenly person, perhaps, or a policeman] is a pig”), then one could perhaps construe such expressions as instances of animism everywhere. But notwithstanding the fact that the new animism of the ontological pluralists concerns an identification of nonhuman animals as humans more than an identification of humans as animals (though this too is surely implied), the point of course applies to animal metaphors in all languages and so cannot be adduced in support of any distinctive, pervasive ontology maintained by some humans but not by others. Some Final Remarks As discussed in chapter 2, while generally treated under the heading of “symbolism” conventional metaphors, including ones that employ animals as vehicles, are cognitively different from other ways of speaking about and, implicitly, thinking about the world that have been described as “symbolic.” As the Nage evidence confirms, conventional metaphors are recognized by their users as figurative expressions, usages that are consciously symbolic,

SOCIAL AND ONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

363

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 364

and it is principally in this respect that they differ from ideas that have been called “beliefs,” “cultural representations,” or, indeed, “metaphors” in a nonconventional, extended sense. While dismissing “metaphor” as a Western, “naturalist” construction that distorts non-Western realities, ontological pluralists have unfortunately failed to distinguish clearly between these two current (though unequal) acceptations of “metaphor.” Yet in a transparent attempt to explain away evidence weighing against his model of “animism,” Descola, despite some rather obscurantist wording, inadvertently reveals the presence of conventional animal metaphors in what, according to his own criteria, would appear to be the most “animist” of non-Western societies. And by so doing, he provides further support for the universal occurrence of this way of speaking and thinking, especially about humans but, implicitly, about animals as well. But were Descola (2013, 250) to acknowledge the distinction between, on the one hand, conventional metaphor (or metaphor in the usual sense of the term) as an essentially figurative and consciously symbolic kind of representation, and, on the other hand, what in one place he calls “unconscious metaphor,” his theory of ontological differences among humans could be strengthened. Indeed, he seems almost to do so when he speaks of what are evidently conventional metaphors as nothing more than “handy labels” – which must mean a way of speaking – or categories that are “borrowed,” a phrasing that surely recalls the notion of transfer central to the European concept of metaphor. At the same time, this evaluation entails treating such usages as unimportant, playing no real part in the social lives of their users, and furthermore as irrelevant to matters of epistemology or ontology. The regular use of well over five hundred animal metaphors by the Nage – a small-scale eastern Indonesian society that, in most respects, does not differ from the Amerindian and Siberian societies on which the ontological pluralists place their greatest reliance – shows how mistaken this approach can be.

364

A D O G P I S S I N G AT T H E E D G E O F A PAT H

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 365

Notes

cha p ter on e 1 Ana Wa is also the name of a Nage clan, but this is understood not as “animal” but as “People of the Wind,” and the clan is alternatively known as Wa (“Wind”), or woe Wa (woe is “clan”). 2 Comparing Dutch and Afrikaans animal metaphors, Dirven (1994) argues that sometimes the “image” of a European animal (e.g., the fox) has been transferred to a morphologically and behaviourally similar African animal (e.g., the jackal). He also notes that while “crow” is a metaphorical vehicle in both languages, the name actually refers to different corvid species in the two cases and, partly for this reason, has different interpretations when applied to humans. 3 In Forth 2004a I mostly refer to the usages as “similes.” I would now judge this to be an unwarranted over-generalization. cha p ter t wo 1 See Ngadha péle, glossed in part as “to seal, cut off, barricade, dam up, separate (from)” and “to conceal, protect, shelter”; and pata péle, translated as “allusion, metaphor, simile, proverb” (Arndt 1961). For Lio, Arndt (1933) lists péle as “to speak in metaphors or similes” as well as péle pata, an obvious variant of Nage pata péle, as a term for “metaphor” or “simile.” Curiously, several Nage thought péle was a word borrowed from Indonesian, and indeed

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 366

péle, possibly deriving from Ambonese Malay, can be heard in the Indonesian spoken by Nage. However, the occurrence of the word in dictionaries of Lio and Ngadha, the first compiled in the 1920s, removes any doubt that the word is indigenous to these languages, or at the very least that it preceded the colonial period on Flores. 2 Only during my most recent trip to Flores (in October 2018) did I realize that, when speaking Indonesian, Nage will sometimes refer to a metaphorical meaning as arising when a statement describing an animal is “taken, brought, conveyed” (bawa), or “pulled” (tarik) to humans or (less often) is “linked” (kait) with humans. The usage certainly suggests an understanding of metaphor as involving a connection as well as a separation between source and target domains. However, it is not an idiom indigenous to the Nage language, nor can I find any definite indication of it in Indonesian dictionaries. 3 Also unlike Evans-Pritchard, Willis (1974, 14–15) speaks of Nuer relations with wild animals as “metaphorical,” specifically animals described by Evans-Prichard (1956) as Nuer totems. 4 Interestingly, the metaphorical identification of humans as “god’s chickens” may suggest a connection with Nage metaphors in which “chicken” refers, metonymically, to wife-takers (Nos. 268, 276). Particularly relevant here is the similarity between the Nage term for “wife-giver,” moi ga’e, literally “lord [and] master,” and ga’e déwa, the usual term for “god,” as well as several respects in which the power of wife-givers over wife-takers, the former being conceived as essential to the creation of children and therefore as sources of life, is comparable to the power Nage view god as exercising over humans in general. By all indications, however, the notion of humans as “god’s chickens” stands on its own and is not motivated by any aspect of the Nage system of asymmetric marriage alliance. Nor is it likely that the identification of wifetakers with chickens, or, more specifically, the requirement that they provide chickens to wife-givers, derives from a conception of humans in general as chickens of god. ch ap ter thre e 1 Here translated as “journey,” wesa is a dialectal equivalent of central Nage zala, “path.” In central Nage wesa means “door, doorway.”

366

N O T E S T O PA G E S 3 6 – 8 5

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 367

cha p ter f ive 1 The foregoing corrects Forth (2004a, 185), where the expression was given incorrectly as edho bédho; also, contrary to what may be suggested in this earlier reference, the phrase does not necessarily complement piko ta’a wito io (No. 393). In the first instance I apparently mistook edo for edho “to pull out, up,” whereas bédho is a simple mistranscription. 2 In Forth (2004a, 185) bebe was transcribed incorrectly as bhebhe. 3 For the sake of comparison with the Nage list, I include “bat” in the English list but exclude “cock,” “hen,” and “rooster” since these are all covered by Nage manu (chicken or domestic fowl). Some of Palmatier’s interpretations are suspect. For example, it is not clear that “booby” as a reference to a fool or insane person derives from the identically named seabird, nor that the bird called jay is the source of “jaywalk.” Coincidentally, however, “jay” can mean “an impertinent chatterer,” “a flashy or absurdly dressed person,” or “a stupid or silly person,” while “gannet,” the name of a seabird not unlike a booby, further refers to “a greedy person” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary) – two usages that Palmatier, whose focus is American English, does not record. 4 “Binomial” is sometimes employed only for “productive binomials” – terms in which a second name specifies a subclass of the category denoted by the first, as in Nage kolo dhoro (Barred dove), naming a kind of kolo (small dove). In contrast, I use “binomial” to refer to any name that comprises two analyzable lexemes, including “unproductive” names like ie wea (mynah) and koko wodo (scrubfowl). With just six exceptions, all binomials included in the seventy-two Nage bird categories are unproductive, and of these three are employed as metaphors and three are not. ch a p ter si x 1 While still harvested in other parts of Flores, the fry are no longer caught in central Nage owing to the construction several decades ago of a dam on the river Ae Sésa, the main water course in which the fry of marine-breeding fish occurred (Forth 2016, 213–14, 221–2). 2 One might also count mépu, but this is regarded as a large kind of hiku (pit viper; Forth 2016, 186–8), thus a folk-specific category, and is therefore implicitly encompassed by the one Nage metaphor that employs the pit viper.

N O T E S T O PA G E S 2 6 2 – 7 6

367

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 368

3 This corrects my previous statement that there were seven frog metaphors (Forth 2016, 221), though this did not include “tadpole.” cha p ter seven 1 A motif regularly carved on parts of Nage houses and buildings of ritual significance is sometimes referred to as a “butterfly.” This, however, is not the name of the motif, which, unlike some other carving motifs, is usually described as nameless. And no one knew its significance – other than as a motif that has always been used. 2 I am grateful to John Acorn, a zoologist at the University of Alberta, for advice regarding the identification of this insect and also for alerting me to the phenomenon of “nectar robbing” (see No. 502). ch ap ter ei g ht 1 Intuitively, this figure may seem low. It largely reflects the fact that two porcupine and three civet folk-specifics as well as three rat generics are not specifically employed as metaphors. 2 European examples of such metaphors include “dog in the manger” and “nourishing a viper in one’s bosom,” both derived from Aesop’s fables. 3 Distinguishing by life form, the figure for mammals is 18 (8 domestic and 10 wild), for birds 22, for other non-mammalian vertebrates 7, and for invertebrates 10. With the partial exception of mammals, which account for over 42 percent of all metaphors, these totals correspond reasonably closely to the proportion of usages employing members of different life forms. 4 In a few instances Nage metaphors refer expressly to people as spirits. Thus, a handsome man can be called a “male spirit” (hoga nitu) while a person who does something in a contrary manner can be described as “like a nitu spirit who inverts things with ease” (Forth 1998, 65). In the first example, however, the expression is an unequivocal compliment, and it hardly needs remarking how the same meaning could not possibly be conveyed by “snake,” “eel,” or any other animal identified with nitu spirits. As for the second, various forms of inversion are for Nage such a definitive attribute of nitu that no other entity could metaphorically serve as well. Also worth mentioning is “spirit firearm” (bedi nitu), another spirit metaphor employed as the sole proper name of an insect, the Bombardier beetle. Nage similarly describe, but do not name,

368

N O T E S T O PA G E S 2 7 8 – 3 3 2

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 369

monitor lizards as “spirit coconut graters,” with reference to the shape of the lizard’s head; a kind of eel as a “spirit weaving sword”; and referring to its speed, the bronzeback snake (No. 434) as a “spirit blowgun.” But while all these usages can be understood as metaphors – in fact Nage describe them as no more than “ways of speaking” (Forth 2016, 244) – they are obviously not animal metaphors. cha p ter n i ne 1 For another eastern Indonesian example of this principle, see Onvlee (1983) on house construction on Sumba. 2 Another seventeenth-century philosopher, Ralph Cudworth, also advanced a radically contrary position, arguing not only that animals have thoughts and feelings but that, like humans, they also have souls (Harrison 1998; see also Passmore 1951, 24–5, 28). Interestingly, the Nage concept of mae (“soul”), corresponding in many respects to the Christian concept, is not something Nage ordinarily attribute to animals. 3 All these examples, and others that could be cited, are drawn from Palmatier (1993). The same point could of course be made with reference to non-animal metaphors, for example “the pot calling the kettle black.” 4 Descola argues that naturalism has deep roots in Western history. This is not the place to consider how far the modern or “scientific” view of humans and animals is in fact continuous with pre-scientific, Christian views, but I would just mention 1 Corinthians 15:39, where it is stated that “All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.” Surely this suggests that humans and animals do not possess the same “exteriority.” What is more, opinion on whether or not animals have souls appears to have varied considerably over the ages, both among churchmen and philosophers. 5 Descola erroneously cites the original publication date as 1947 and, in his bibliography, lists a 1985 edition. The correct dates are the ones I give here. Leopold’s book was most recently republished in 2013.

N O T E S T O PA G E S 3 4 9 – 6 3

369

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 370

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 371

References

Ammer, C. 1989. It’s Raining Cats and Dogs … and Other Beastly Expressions. New York: Dell Publishing. Arndt, Paul. 1933. Li’onesisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch. Ende-Flores: ArnoldusDruckerei. – 1961. Wörterbuch der Ngadhasprache. Studia Instituti Anthropos, 15. Posieux, Fribourg, Suisse: Anthropos-Institut. Bader, H. 1971. “Der Regenbogen in der Auffassung der Florinesen.” Anthropos 66: 947–77. Barnes, R.H. 1973. “The Rainbow in the Representations of Inhabitants of the Flores Area of Indonesia.” Anthropos 68: 611–13. Berlin, Brent. 1992. Ethnobiological Classification: Principles of Categorization of Plants and Animals in Traditional Societies. Princeton, nj: Princeton University Press. Bird-David, Nurit. 1999. “‘Animism’ Revisited: Personhood, Environment, and Relational Epistemology.” Current Anthropology 40, Supplement: S67–S79. Black, Max. 1962. Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca, ny: Cornell University Press. Blust, Robert, and Stephen Trussel. 2010–ongoing. The Comparative Austronesian Dictionary. www.trussel2.com/ACD. Boyer, P. 1994. The Naturalness of Religious Ideas: A Cognitive Theory of Religion. Berkeley: University of California Press. Coates, Brian J., and K. David Bishop. 1997. A Guide to the Birds of Wallacea: Sulawesi, the Moluccas and Lesser Sunda Islands. Alderley, au: Dove Publications.

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 372

Cochetti, Stefano. 1995. “The Dogon Sacrifice as a Literal Metaphor.” Paragrana 4 (2): 144–50. Crocker, J. Christopher. 1977a. “My Brother the Parrot.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 164–92. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. – 1977b. “The Social Functions of Rhetorical Forms.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 33–66. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. D’Andrade, Roy G. 1995. The Development of Cognitive Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Darwin, Charles. 1872. The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. London: John Murray. Descola, Philipe. 2013 [2005]. Beyond Nature and Culture. Translated from the French by Janet Lloyd. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Dirven, René. 1994. Metaphor and Nation: Metaphors Afrikaners Live By. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Echols, John M. and Hassan Shadily. 1989. An Indonesian-English Dictionary. 3rd ed. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Eco, Umberto. 2003. Mouse or Rat? Translation as Negotiation. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Evans-Pritchard, E.E. 1940. The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Oxford: Clarendon Press. – 1956. Nuer Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fernandez, James W. 1986. Persuasions and Performances: The Play of Tropes in Culture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Forth, Gregory. 1981. Rindi: An Ethnographic Study of a Traditional Domain in Eastern Sumba. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. – 1988. “Apes and Dugongs: Common Mythological Themes in Diverse Southeast Asian Communities.” Contributions to Southeast Asian Ethnography 7: 189–229. – 1989. “Animals, Witches and Wind: Eastern Indonesian Variations on the ‘Thunder Complex.’” Anthropos 84: 89–106. – 1991. “Nage Directions: An Eastern Indonesian System of Spatial Orientation.” In Social Space, ed. O. Grøn, E. Engelstad, and I. Lindblom, 138–48. Odense: Odense University Press. – 1992. “The Pigeon and the Friarbird: The Mythical Origin of Death and Daylight in Eastern Indonesia.” Anthropos 87: 423–41. – 1993 “Social and Symbolic Aspects of the Witch among the Nage of Eastern Indone-

372

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 373

sia.” In Understanding Witchcraft and Sorcery in Southeast Asia, ed. C.W. Watson and R.F. Ellen, 99–122. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. – 1994 “‘Post’ Modernism: Issues of Meaning, Cultural Objectification and NationalLocal Distinctions in an Eastern Indonesian Community.” In Official Rhetoric, Popular Response: Dialogue and Resistance in Indonesia and the Philippines, ed. J. Nourse and G. Acciaioli, 144–56. Special issue of Social Analysis 35. – 1998. Beneath the Volcano: Religion, Cosmology and Spirit Classification among the Nage of Eastern Indonesia. Leiden: kitlv Press – 2000. “Eastern Sumbanese Bird Classification.” Journal of Ethnobiology 20 (2): 161–92. – 2004a. Nage Birds: Classification and Symbolism among an Eastern Indonesian People. London: Routledge. – 2004b. “Public Affairs: Institutionalized Non-Marital Sex in an Eastern Indonesian Society.” Bijdragen tot de Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde 160 (2/3): 315–38. – 2004c. “A ‘Cock’ and ‘Bull’ Story: Nage Sex Terms and Their Implications for Ethnozoological Classification.” Anthropological Linguistics 46 (4): 427–49. – 2005. “The Diatribe of ‘Ajo Bupu and the Oration of Lowa Bata: Examples of Parallelistic Speaking among the Nage of Central Flores (Indonesia).” Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 6 (1): 35–56. – 2006. “Words for ‘Bird’ in Eastern Indonesia.” Journal of Ethnobiology 26 (2): 177–207. – 2007a. “Can Animals Break Taboos? Applications of ‘Taboo’ among the Nage of Eastern Indonesia.” Oceania 77 (2): 215–31. – 2007b. “Pigeon and Friarbird Revisited: A Further Analysis of an Eastern Indonesian Mythico-Ornithological Contrast.” Anthropos 102: 495–513. – 2007c. “Transformation and Replacement: A Comparison of Some Indonesian Bird Myths.” In Pika-Pika: The Flashing Firefly: Essays to Honour the Life of Pauline Hetland Walker (1938–2005), ed. Anthony R. Walker, 359–77. Delhi: Hindustan Publishing Corporation. – 2008. Images of the Wildman in Southeast Asia: An Anthropological Perspective. London: Routledge (paperback edition 2012). – 2009a. “Tree Totems and the Tamarind People: Implications of Clan Plant Taboos in Central Flores.” Oceania 79: 263–79. – 2009b. “Symbolic Birds and Ironic Bats: Varieties of Classification in Nage Folk Ornithology.” Ethnology 48 (2): 139–59. – 2009c. “Separating the Dead: The Ritual Transformation of Affinal Exchange in Central Flores.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.) 15: 557–74.

REFERENCES

373

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 374

– 2011. “Charcoal, Eggplants, and Small Hairy Hominoids: Dietary and Behavioural Components of a ‘Wildman’ Image from West Central Flores (Indonesia).” Anthropos 106: 57–68. – 2012a. “Marking-Reversals and Their Relevance for Prehistory: An Eastern Indonesian Case.” Oceanic Linguistics 51 (2): 456–69. – 2012b. “Of Mice and Rats: The Place of Murids in Nage Animal Classification and Symbolism.” Journal of Ethnobiology 32 (1): 50–72. – 2013. “Symbolic Lizards: An Exploration of Forms of Special Purpose Classification of Animals among the Nage of Eastern Indonesia.” Anthrozoös 26 (3): 357–72. – 2015. “Lumpers, Splitters, and Other Variations in Nage Animal Classification.” Journal of Ethnobiology 35 (2): 386–407. – 2016. Why the Porcupine Is Not a Bird: Explorations in the Folk Zoology of an Eastern Indonesian People. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. – 2017a. “What a Little Bird Tells Us about Symbolic Thought: The Russett-Capped Stubtail (Tesia everetti) in Nage Augury, Myth, and Metaphor.” Journal of Ethnobiology 37 (4): 689–99. – 2017b. “Cryptids, Classification, and Categories of Cats: An Ethnozoological Study of Unidentified Felids from Eastern Indonesia.” In Anthropology and Cryptozoology, ed. Samantha Hurn, 32–53. London: Routledge. – 2017c. “Ethnographic Reports of Freshwater Turtles on Flores Island: The Possibilities of an Undocumented Chelonian Species.” Herpetological Review 48 (2): 304–10. – 2018a. “Elderly People Growing Tails: The Constitution of a Non-Empirical Idea.” Current Anthropology 15 (4): 397–414. – 2018b. “‘Living’ in Nage, or the Meaning of ‘Life’ in an Eastern Indonesian Society.” Oceania 88 (2): 168–82. – 2018c. “Sex Differentiable Terms in Languages of Flores Island: A Comparative Review.” Oceanic Linguistics 57 (1): 101–22. – 2018d. “Further Evidence for Undocumented Freshwater Turtles on Flores Island, Indonesia.” Herpetological Review 49 (1): 19–21. Forth, Gregory, and Svitlana Kukharenko. 2012. “Animals Crossing: Analytical Observations on a Cross-Culturally Ubiquitous Mortuary Belief.” Folkore 123 (2): 152–78. Fox, James J. 1971. “Sister’s Child as Plant: Metaphors in an Idiom of Consanguinity.” In Rethinking Kinship and Marriage, ed. Rodney Needham, 219–52. London: Tavistock. Franklyn, Julian. 1975. A Dictionary of Rhyming Slang. 2nd ed. [first 1960]. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

374

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 375

Geertz, Clifford. 1972. “Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight.” In The Interpretation of Cultures, 412–53. New York: Basic Books (Originally published in Daedalus 101 [1972]: 1–37). Glucksberg, Sam, and Boaz Keysar. 1993. “How Metaphors Work.” In Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed., ed. Andrew Ortony, 401–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Goatly, Andrew. 2006. “Humans, Animals, and Metaphors.” Society and Animals 14 (1): 15–37. Gudeman, Stephen. 1986. Economics as Culture: Models and Metaphors of Livelihood. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Hammersley, Martyn, and Paul Atkinson. 2007. Ethnography: Principles in Practice. 3rd ed. London: Routledge. Harrison, Peter. 1998. “The Virtues of Animals in Seventeenth-Century Thought.” Journal of the History of Ideas 59 (3): 463–84. Harvey, Graham. 2006. Animism: Respecting the Living World. New York: Columbia University Press. Holbraad, Martin and Morten Axel Pederson. 2017. The Ontological Turn: An Anthropological Exposition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Howe, James. 1977. “Carrying the Village: Cuna Political Metaphors.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 132–63. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Hunn, Eugene S. 1999. “Size as Limiting the Recognition of Biodiversity in Folkbiological Classifications: One of Four Factors Governing the Cultural Recognition of Biological Taxa.” In Folkbiology, ed. Douglas L. Medin and Scott Atran, 47–69. Cambridge, ma: mit Press. – 2011. “Ethnozoology.” In Ethnobiology, ed. Eugene N. Anderson, Deborah Pearsall, and Eugene S. Hunn, 83–95. Hoboken, nj: Wiley Blackwell. Hurn, Samantha. 2012. Humans and Other Animals: Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Human-Animal Interactions. London: Pluto Press. Hutchinson, Sharon E. 1996. Nuer Dilemmas: Coping with Money, War, and the State. Berkeley: University of California Press. Ingold, Tim. 2011. The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. London: Routledge. – 2016. “End Comment: To Conclude in the Spirit of Rebirth, or a Note on Animic Anthropo-ontogenesis.” In Animism in Southeast Asia, ed. K. Århem and G. Sprenger, 302–9. London: Routledge. Irwin, Rebecca E., Judith L. Bronstein, Jessamyn S. Manson, and Leif Richardson.

REFERENCES

375

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 376

2010. “Nectar Robbing: Ecological and Evolutionary Perspectives.” Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 41: 271–92. Jackson, Michael. 1996. “Introduction: Phenomenology, Radical Empiricism, and Anthropological Critique.” In Things as They Are: New Directions in Phenomenological Anthropology, ed. M. Jackson, 1–50. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Jakobson, R., and M. Halle. 1956. Fundamentals of Language. The Hague: Mouton. Jones, Ernest. 1948. Papers on Psycho-analysis. 5th ed. London: Bailliere, Tindall and Cox. Keesing, Roger. 1985. “Conventional Metaphors and Anthropological Metaphysics: The Problematic of Cultural Translation.” Journal of Anthropological Research 41: 201–17. Kövecses, Zoltán. 2010. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Larson, Helen, K. 2011. “Systematics of the Rhyacichthyidae.” In The Biology of Gobies, ed. R.A. Patzner, James L. Van Tassell, Marcelo Kovacic, and B.G. Kapoor, 51–60. New York: crc Press, New York. Lawrence, Elizabeth. 1993. “The Sacred Bee, the Filthy Pig, and the Bat out of Hell: Animal Symbolism as Cognitive Biophilia.” Biophilia Hypothesis, ed. Stephen R. Kellert and Edward O. Wilson, 301–41. Washington, dc: The Island Press. Leach, E.R. 1976. Culture and Communication: The Logic by Which Symbols Are Connected. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leopold, Aldo. 1987 [1949]. A Sand County Almanach: And Sketches Here and There. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1963. Totemism. Boston: Beacon Press. Levin, Samuel R. 1993. “Language, Concepts, and Worlds: Three Domains of Metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought, ed. Andrew Ortony, 112–23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Liebow, Elliot. 1967. Tally’s Corner: A Study of Negro Streetcorner Men. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company. Mathijsen, A. 1906. Tettum-Hollandsce woordenlijst, met beknopte spraakkunst. Verhandelingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen. Vol. 56 (2).

376

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 377

Midgley, Mary. 2002 Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature. London: Routledge. Miller, George A. 1993. “Images and Models, Similes and Metaphors.” In Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed. Ed. Andrew Ortony, 357–400. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Morgan, Jerry L. 1993. “Observations on the Pragmatics of Metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed., ed. Andrew Ortony, 124–34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Needham, Rodney. 1972. Belief, Language, and Experience. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Ohnuki-Tierney, Emiko. 1987. The Monkey as Mirror: Symbolic Transformations in Japanese History and Ritual. Princeton, nj: Princeton University Press. Olatéju, Adésola. 2005. “The Yorùbá Animal Metaphors: Analysis and Interpretation.” Nordic Journal of African Studies 14 (3): 368–83. Onvlee, Louis. 1983. “The Construction of the Dam in Mangili: Notes on the Social Organization of Eastern Sumba.” In Structural Anthropology in the Netherlands, ed. P.E. de Josselin de Jong, 150–63. Dordrecht, nl: Springer. – 1984. Kamberaas (Oost-Soembaas)-Nederlands woordenbook. Dordrecht, nl: Foris Publications. Ortony, Andrew. 1993. “The Role of Similarity in Similes and Metaphors.” In Metaphor and Thought, ed. Andrew Ortony, 342–56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Palmatier, R. 1995. Speaking of Animals: A Dictionary of Animal Metaphors. Westport, ct: Greenwood Press. Pareira, M. Mandalangi, and E. Douglas Lewis. 1998. Kamus Sara Sikka Bahasa Indonesia. Ende, Flores: Penerbit Nusa Indah. – n.d. Kamus Bahasa Indonesia-Sara Sikka An Indonesian – Sikkanese Dictionary oleh Edmundus Pareira and E. D. Lewis. Privately published. Passmore, J.A. 1951. Ralph Cudworth: An Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Peirce, C.S. 1930–35. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Ed. C. Harteshorne and P. Weiss. Cambridge, ma: Harvard University Press. Radcliffe-Brown, A.R. 1951. “The Comparative Method in Social Anthropology.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 81: 15–22. Richards, I.A. 1936. The Philosophy of Rhetoric. London: Oxford University Press. Rosaldo, Michelle Z. 1980. Knowledge and Passion: Ilongot Notions of Self and Social Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Salvucci, D.D., and N.A. Taatgen. 2011. The Multitasking Mind. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

REFERENCES

377

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 378

Sandor, Andras. 1986. “Metaphor and Belief.” Journal of Anthropological Research 42 (2): 101–22. Sapir, J.D. 1977. “The Anatomy of Metaphor.” In The Social Use of Metaphor: Essays on the Anthropology of Rhetoric, ed. J. David Sapir and J. Christopher Crocker, 3–32. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Simpson, K., and N. Day. 1993. Field Guide to the Birds of Australia. 4th ed. Ringwood, au: Viking O’Neil, Penguin Books Australia Ltd. Sommer, Robert, and Barbara A. Sommer. 2011. “Zoomorphy: Animals Metaphors for Human Personality.” Anthrozoös 24 (3): 237–48. Sperber, Dan. 1975. Rethinking Symbolism. Translated from the French by Alice L. Morton. Cambridge, uk: Cambridge University Press. Tambiah, S.J. 1969. “Animals are Good to Think and Good to Prohibit.” Ethnology 8 (4): 423–59. Tule, Philipus. 1998. Keonese-Indonesian-English Dictionary. Privately published. Turner, Terence. 1991. “‘We Are Parrots,’ ‘Twins Are Birds’: Play of Tropes as Operational Structure.” In Beyond Metaphor: The Theory of Tropes in Anthropology, ed. James W. Fernandez, 121–58. Stanford, ca: Stanford University Press. Turner, Victor. 1967. The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual. Ithaca, ny: Cornell University of Press. Tylor, E.B. 1866. “The Religion of Savages.” Fortnightly Review 6: 71–86. – 1958 [1871]. Primitive Culture, Vol. 2. New York: Harper and Row. Urban, Greg. 1996. Metaphysical Community: The Interplay of the Senses and the Intellect. Austin: University of Texas Press. Urton, Gary, ed. 1985. Animal Myths and Metaphors in South America. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Valeri, Valerio. 2000. The Forest of Taboos: Morality, Hunting, and Identity among the Huaulu of the Moluccas. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Van den Bergh, G.D., H.J.M. Meijer, Rokus Awe Due, M.J. Morwood, K. Szabo, L.W. van den Hoek Ostende, T. Sutikna, E.W. Saptomo, P.J. Piper, and K.M. Dobney. 2009. “The Liang Bua Faunal Remains: A 9.5. k.yr. Sequence from Flores, East Indonesia.” Journal of Human Evolution 57: 527–37. Van Suchtelen, B.C.C.M.M. 1919–21. Endeh (Flores). Mededeelingen van het Bureau voor de Bestuurszaken der Buitengewesten, bewerkt door het Encylopaedisch Bureau, Aflevering 26. Weltevreden: Papyrus. Verheijen, Jilis A.J. 1990. Dictionary of Plant Names in the Lesser Sunda Islands. Pacific Linguistics Series D, 83. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies.

378

REFERENCES

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 379

Viveiros de Castro. E. 1998. “Cosmological Deixis and Amerindian Perspectivism.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.) 4: 469–88. – 2004. “Perspectival Anthropology and the Method of Controlled Equivocation.” Tipiti 2 (1): 3–22. – 2014 [2009]. Cannibal Metaphysics: For a Post-Structural Anthropology. Translated from the French by Peter Skafish. Minneapolis: Univocal. Wagner, Roy. 1986. Symbols That Stand for Themselves. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. West, Harry G. 2007. Ethnographic Sorcery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Willis, Roy. 1974. Man and Beast. New York: Basic Books. Wurm, S.A., and Shiro Hattori, eds. 1981. Language Atlas of the Pacific Area. Canberra: Australian Academy of the Humanities in collaboration with the Japan Academy.

REFERENCES

379

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 380

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 381

Index

Acorn, John, 368n2 Aesop’s fables, 60, 131, 368n2 (ch. 8) affinal alliance, asymmetric marriage alliance, 4, 110, 173, 176, 345, 346, 366n4. See also bridewealth; marriage; wifegivers and wife-takers Afrikaans, 355, 365n2 Ammer, C., 85, 141, 181–2 analogy, 16, 19, 20, 39, 40, 43–4, 45, 49, 111, 134, 176, 246; external and internal, 20, 43–4 ancestors, 59, 169–70, 292 animal, animals: Nage term for “animal,” 8, 365n1 (ch. 1); Nage concept of, 8, 53, 331, 332, 333–5; prominence in metaphors, 3, 27, 313; size of animals affecting metaphorical prominence, 160, 304, 309, 313, 315, 351 animism, 12, 28–9, 46, 51–22, 271, 354, 355, 358–63, 364 anthropomorphism, 356–7, 358 ants, 42, 172, 220, 254–5, 266, 280, 283, 285–8, 300, 309, 319, 351 arachnids. See invertebrates; scorpions; spiders Arenga palm, 75, 106, 122, 143, 234–5, 319. See also toddy Aristotle, 18 Arndt, P., 89, 133, 296, 365n1 (ch. 2) augury, 3, 161, 169, 183, 205. See also omens

Bahasa Indonesia. See Indonesian national language Bali, Balinese, 41, 42, 17; Balinese cows, cattle, 78–9, 80 bats, 143, 162–5, 282, 311, 313, 315, 316, 317 bedbugs, 291, 298–9, 310, 319 bees, 39, 280, 284, 288–9, 291, 350 beetles, 10, 74, 281, 291–4, 300, 309, 317, 318, 320, 321, 348, 350, 368n4 belief: contrasting to metaphor, 28, 40, 41, 48, 49–52, 54, 55, 67, 143, 162, 190, 213, 229, 257, 291, 320–4, 330, 331–2 Berlin, B., 327 betel and areca (nut), 58, 181, 197, 218–19 binary composites, 11, 53, 58, 87, 91–2, 97, 122, 127, 145, 170, 226–7, 230, 231, 285, 298, 302, 328–9 birds, 20, 40, 43, 46, 126, 148, 279, 284, 309, 310–11, 323, 368n3 (ch. 8), 369n4; bird metaphors, 53, 120, 161–242, 287, 310, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 320, 321, 324, 326, 329, 337, 341–2; category of “bird,” 162; witch birds, 192, 194, 221, 225, 324 birds of prey, 190, 194, 210, 216, 219, 221, 225, 316, 323. See also eagles; owls Bororo, 6, 40, 41, 42–6, 343 Boyer, P., 18–19 bridewealth, 4, 32, 48, 54, 58–9, 62, 63, 68, 77, 78, 80, 83, 85, 92, 103, 169, 174, 178, 181, 185, 287, 320, 324, 325, 328, 347

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 382

buffalo (water buffalo), 4, 16, 19–20, 26, 54–67, 68, 69, 78, 82, 84, 85, 90, 91, 94, 96, 111, 117, 130, 146, 159–60, 163, 164, 184, 185, 186, 232, 287, 314, 315, 318, 326, 328, 331, 339, 340, 342, 346, 348, 349, 350, 359; human identification with, 45–8, 49, 50, 55, 220, 323–4, 332, 359, 360 bugs: true bugs, 294–5. See also invertebrates bushchat (bird), 161, 165–6, 241, 329 bushlark (bird), 166 butterflies, 279, 324, 368n1 (ch. 7) carving, 261, 275, 368n1 (ch. 7) Catholicism. See Christianity cats, 11, 53, 91, 92, 97, 112, 113–21, 143, 145, 146, 148, 160, 177, 313, 315, 318, 337, 339– 41, 342, 344, 346, 347, 350, 352, 359; ngo ngoe (kind of wild cat), 54, 114, 119, 279, 310, 327, 334 cattle, 54, 55, 78–9, 80, 81, 96, 160, 315, 340; among the Nuer, 40–1, 42, 64 centipedes, 298, 306, 308 Chestnut-backed thrush, 242 chickens, 15–16, 40, 64, 65, 105, 117, 159, 169–86, 187, 195, 205, 214, 218, 221, 225, 229, 240, 293, 310, 312, 314, 315, 319, 323, 326, 337, 344, 347, 350, 351, 369n3; god’s chickens (chickens of god), human beings as, 18, 43–4, 45, 46–7, 49, 51, 172, 342, 360, 366n4 children: metaphors referring to, 8, 81, 85, 90, 94, 98, 104, 105, 114, 138, 146, 152, 157, 166, 205, 236, 245, 263, 264, 280, 282, 291, 294, 295, 298, 302, 316–17, 342, 351, 366n4 Christianity, 4, 50, 77, 172, 201, 225–6, 270, 369n2, 369n4 chronological signs: metaphors referring to, 101, 167, 168, 202, 206–7, 222, 239, 316, 320, 324, 325, 326 circle-dancing, 31, 92, 106, 130, 187, 217, 259–60, 266, 308 civet (Palm civet), xii, 81, 92, 114, 116, 142– 7, 160, 312, 315, 317, 318, 319, 321, 329, 337, 340, 347, 350, 351, 352, 368n1 (ch. 8) cockatoos, 147, 167, 169, 186–9, 190, 192, 209, 221, 241, 275, 329, 338, 348, 349

382

cock-fighting, 173; in Bali, 41, 42, 47 cockroaches, 247, 295–7, 319, 347, 349 cognitivism: cognitive aspects of metaphor and symbolism, 18–19, 47, 49–51, 321, 331, 335, 359, 363 composite terms, expressions. See binary composites conventional metaphor. See metaphor crabs. See crustaceans crickets. See grasshoppers Crocker, J.C., 40, 41, 42, 43–4 crocodiles, 12, 243, 244, 272–5, 313, 319, 341, 345, 347 crow, 167, 187, 188–9, 190–1, 209, 222, 225, 316, 324, 348, 355, 365n2; Flores crow, 190, 324 crustaceans, 111, 150, 152, 265, 302–6, 309, 316, 322, 357 cuckoos, 174, 190, 236; channel-billed cuckoo, 167–8, 187, 222, 241, 315, 316, 348; koel, 167, 168–9, 187, 222, 241, 315, 316, 348 cuckoo-shrike, 191, 210, 323 Cudworth, R., 369n2 Cuna, 35, 360; concept of metaphor, 35 Darwin, C., 50, 354 Deane, Shelbra, 45 deer, 69, 79, 83, 89, 92, 100, 108, 113, 122–6, 160, 234, 263, 312, 313, 315, 316, 326, 328, 340, 341 Descartes, R., 354, 358 Descola, P., 28, 46, 52, 358, 359, 361–3, 364, 369nn4–5 Dhawe (region), 266 Dirven, R., 13, 365n2 dogs, xi, xii, 9, 11, 14, 19–20, 33, 38–9, 40, 45, 53, 58–9, 65, 74–5, 83, 84, 86–7, 91–103, 105, 108, 112, 114, 116, 119, 127, 130, 144, 146, 148, 154–5, 158, 159, 160, 272, 297, 326, 328, 331, 339, 340, 342, 344, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 350, 351, 355, 356, 357, 361; dog in the manger (English metaphor), 48, 60, 368n2 (ch. 8); Nage dogs, men as, 18, 45, 47, 100, 342, 345; sky dog, 10, 239 dollarbird, 192, 241, 344 dolphins, 10, 38, 263, 273, 278, 316, 346

INDEX

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 383

domestic fowls, 12, 44, 201, 209, 321. See also chickens domestic/wild contrast, 26–7, 48, 53, 85, 96, 103, 110, 113–14, 159–60, 312–13, 314– 15, 325, 326, 327, 340, 368n3 (ch. 8) doves. See pigeons and doves drongo (bird), 192–3, 202, 204, 225, 316, 324, 349 dugong, 264 Dutch, 260; language, 4, 30, 34, 355, 365n2 eagles, 194–5, 210, 225, 241, 313, 314. See also birds of prey earthquake, 291–2, 321, 350 earthworms, 306–7, 319, 322, 349 Ebu Lobo volcano, 68, 86, 88, 149, 240, 273, 300 economy, economic activities, 4, 347–9. See also hunting; rice cultivation eels, 214, 265, 267–8, 302, 322, 323, 331, 368– 9n4 Endenese, 25, 120, 248, 308 English: English animal metaphors, xi–xii, xiii, 3, 7–8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 23, 45, 48, 50, 57, 60, 61, 63, 68, 72, 74, 80, 81, 85, 86, 88, 91, 96, 97, 99, 100, 103, 104, 105, 106, 109–10, 118, 119, 123, 131, 137, 139, 141, 142, 149, 152, 154, 162, 164, 166, 169, 174, 175, 179, 180, 181–2, 187, 194, 195, 209, 211, 214, 217, 220, 221, 236, 239, 240–1, 243–4, 245, 246, 247, 249, 251, 256, 262, 267, 270, 276, 279, 280, 281, 288, 290, 291, 298, 300, 303, 308–9, 311, 337, 343, 357, 363, 367n3; English metaphoric names for animals, 314, 334; for knots, 146; for plants, 64, 120 etu. See pugilistic competitions Evans-Pritchard, E.E., 40–1, 42, 49, 64, 172, 366n3 faeces: animal faeces (defecation, droppings) in metaphor, 56–7, 82, 84, 104, 108, 116, 130, 143, 163, 197, 280, 317, 319, 350 fantail (bird), 198–200, 206, 223, 338, 349 finches, 162, 196–7, 314 fireflies, 292

INDEX

fish, 10, 25, 120, 154, 223, 243–4, 261, 262–7, 277–8, 279, 287, 309, 311, 314, 315, 321, 322, 323, 339, 341, 345, 351, 367n1 (ch. 6), 369n4; crayfish (see crustaceans); fish fry, 156, 243, 266, 278, 287, 306, 329, 351, 357, 367n1 (ch. 6); gobies, 10, 243, 261, 264–5, 315, 345; shark, 263–4, 278, 314. See also dolphins; eels; shellfish fleas: dog fleas, 291, 298–9 flies and mosquitoes, 280, 289–91, 298, 317, 318, 319, 349 Flores (Island), 3–4, 72, 80–1, 114, 117, 129, 130, 142, 152, 158, 226, 229, 236, 243, 261, 264, 275, 305, 365–6n1, 367n1 (ch. 6); animals’ introductions to, 68, 83, 91, 113, 122, 126, 146, 315; languages of, 4, 9, 34, 120, 125, 212 Flores giant rat. See Giant rats Flores green pigeon. See pigeons and doves flying foxes. See bats folk-generics, 10, 26, 53, 132, 162, 240, 241, 243, 279, 309, 310, 314, 326–7, 328; defined, 10; monomial naming of, 327; prominence in metaphor, 9–10, 26 folk-intermediates, 132, 162, 226, 316, 328; defined, 132 folk-specifics, 10, 54, 138, 162, 241, 243, 279, 310, 327, 367n2 (ch. 6), 368n1; defined, 10 friarbird, 11, 123, 166, 186, 193, 201–7, 213, 223, 234–5, 312, 313, 314, 321, 349, 351, 357 frogs, 64, 150, 243, 268–72, 278, 303, 308, 313, 314, 315, 317, 318–19, 321, 341, 346, 349, 350, 368n3 fruit-dove. See pigeons and doves games, 177, 260; children’s games, 126, 138, 292–3, 269, 294, 320; gambling games, 63. See also pugilistic competitions geckoes. See lizards: Tokay geckoes Geertz, C., 41 gender, 181, 208–9, 217, 334, 342, 343–5 Geo, Géro (region), 60, 116–17, 130, 231, 257, 342, 352 Giant rats, 48, 92, 127, 130–2, 133, 134–5, 153, 160, 312, 315, 316, 318, 328, 340, 342, 344, 348, 349, 357

383

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 384

goats, 9, 57, 80, 82, 83–90, 94, 108, 125, 144, 160, 163, 173, 315, 318, 328, 340, 342, 346, 347, 350, 351 goshawk. See birds of prey grasshoppers, 172, 267, 279, 280–2, 293, 309, 317, 319 ground-dove. See pigeons and doves grubs. See insect larvae hawk-owl. See owls herons and egrets, 211–12, 237, 313; nightheron, 101 hominoids: legendary hominoids, 237 homonymy: in motivation of metaphors, 166, 239, 329 house: as a metaphor, 60–1, 136–7, 301, 346–7 Howe, J., 35, 360 Huaulu, 40 human-animal contrast, xii, 6, 8–9, 18, 27, 30, 335, 358–61 humans: human referents of animal metaphors, 336–52; human body parts as referents, 10, 11, 26, 293, 338, 342; human physical features as referents, 146, 338, 344; human body parts as names of animals, 11 humour, xii, 73, 113, 353–4 Hunn, E., 313 hunting, xi, 4, 13, 29, 54, 75, 100, 107–8, 110, 126, 130, 132, 142, 154, 210, 214, 255, 266, 270, 292, 320, 324, 361; annual ritual hunt, 68, 69–70, 113, 122–3, 292, 295; hunting dogs, 75, 91, 98–9, 100, 272 huts: animal metaphors in naming of, 67, 103, 186 hyperbole, 6, 19, 123, 184, 255 Ilongot: concept of metaphor, 35, 41 Imperial pigeon. See pigeons and doves Indonesian national language, 4, 21, 30, 33, 34; metaphors in, 25, 89, 101, 117, 121, 124, 220, 266–7, 269, 286; terms for metaphor, 30. See also MalayoPolynesian languages Ingold, T., 28–30, 358, 362

384

insect larvae, 300–1, 309, 317, 350 insects. See invertebrates interpretation (of metaphor), xii, 14, 21–4, 30, 33, 35, 43–4, 51, 306, 316, 320, 353, 360, 365n2 invertebrates, 26, 258, 279–309, 310, 311, 312, 314, 315, 317, 321, 323, 325, 326, 329, 332, 336, 339, 341, 368n3 (ch. 8) irony, 6, 43, 126, 212 Jakobson, R., 6, 30, 37, 39, 41, 334 junglefowl, 128, 211, 214–16, 226, 227, 323, 337, 344, 346, 351 Kebi, 82, 86, 328, 342 Keesing, R., 41 Keo, 90, 110, 114, 133, 164, 196, 253, 257, 263, 290, 305 kestrel. See birds of prey kite. See birds of prey koel. See cuckoos Kövecses, Z., 7, 14 Labo (region), 60, 92, 98, 347 Lamaholot, 125 Latin, 36, 86, 101, 134 Lévi-Strauss, C., 9, 37–8, 40, 43, 334–5, 356 Lévy-Bruhl, L., 360 life forms, life form taxa, 25, 26, 53, 243, 279, 310, 314, 317, 324, 326, 327, 328, 332, 340, 341, 368n3; defined, 25; use in metaphor, 10, 243 Linnaeus, 50 Lio, 25, 34, 63, 67, 90, 110, 113, 133, 139, 183, 184, 190, 220, 229, 248, 257, 275, 276, 298, 306, 308, 365n1 (ch. 1), 365–6n1 (ch. 2) literacy, 4 lizards, xii, 92, 120, 175, 182, 243–4, 246, 247, 254–62, 277, 279, 283, 310, 312, 313, 314, 315, 319, 321, 322, 329, 341, 345, 348, 356, 357, 368–9n4; Flying lizards, 254, 277; House lizards, 254, 277; monitor lizards, xii, 92, 175, 182, 229, 247, 254–6, 277, 283, 310, 312, 319, 329, 341, 345, 348, 357, 368–9n4; skinks, 254, 257–8, 277, 318, 320, 322, 341; Tokay geckoes, 12, 254, 258–

INDEX

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 385

62, 265, 269, 277, 308, 312, 315, 317, 319, 338, 341, 351–2, 356 louse, lice, 126, 295 macaques. See monkeys magic, magical ritual, 37, 50, 250, 260, 293, 307, 321, 322, 324, 325, 331 Malayo-Polynesian languages, 4, 35, 83, 148, 267 mammals, 3, 25, 26–7, 48, 53–159, 174, 181, 189, 227, 243, 279, 287, 317, 321, 325, 326, 329, 333, 336, 340, 341, 342, 351, 368n3 (ch. 8); domestic mammal metaphors, 53– 121, 160, 326, 336–7, 340; predominance of mammals in metaphors, 26–7, 161, 310–15, 326–7, 333; wild mammal metaphors, 122–59, 160, 336–7, 340, 342; wild mammals as spirit livestock, 48, 323, 332 Manggarai, 120 mantis, 101, 283, 309, 319, 348 marriage, 4, 32–3, 58–9, 75–6, 77, 78, 80, 92, 98, 104, 111, 169, 173, 180–1, 185, 186, 283, 284, 287, 343, 345, 347, 366n4; polygyny, 77, 270; trial marriage, 152 metaphor: anthropological uses of “metaphor,” 28, 36–42, 43, 49, 343, 358, 360, 364; and belief, 49–51; cognitive distinctiveness of, 47, 49–50, 51, 321–2, 331, 359, 363–4; conceptual metaphor, 12–13, 41, 50, 81, 84–5, 100, 107, 114, 209, 346; conventional metaphor, 7–8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 24, 25, 27, 29, 30, 36–8, 39, 40, 41, 42, 47–8, 49, 50–1, 84, 190, 219, 313, 315, 322, 329, 330–2, 334, 343, 353, 360, 361, 363, 364; definition of metaphor, 5–6; empirical basis of animal metaphors, 15, 16–17, 48, 49, 51, 317–21; human metaphors, 355; influence on quasiempirical ideas, 134, 322; metaphors motivated by non-empirical ideas, 321– 2, 324, 325–6, 329–30; Nage concept of, 18, 30–6, 47, 50, 51, 365n1 (ch. 2); original Greek sense of “metaphor,” 5–6; private metaphor, 261; and simile, 17–19, 30, 38, 42, 365n3, 365n1 (ch. 2); social and moral

INDEX

use of metaphors, 336–52; social efficacy of animal metaphors, 352–4; source and target domains, 13–15, 17, 22, 36, 51, 335, 366n2; translation of, 21, 25; visual metaphor, 11. See also metonymy; motivation methods, field methods, 20–5 metonymy, 6–7, 17, 19, 36, 37, 39, 40, 43, 58, 176, 181, 366n4 mice. See rats and mice Midgley, M., 354 monkeys, 10, 13, 16, 92, 97, 117, 127, 129, 144, 146–59, 160, 189, 190, 245, 252, 260, 266– 7, 293, 305, 312, 315, 318, 321, 329, 335, 339, 340, 342, 343, 344, 346, 349, 350, 351, 357, 361; in Japan, 41 Montaine, M. de, 354 Morgan, J., 7 motivation, 14, 15–17, 19, 21–4, 25–6, 315– 26, 327–31, 356; cultural motivation, 16, 320–6, 328, 330 multitasking, 349 Munde (region), 125 mynah (bird), 222–3, 367n4 myth, myths, 3, 6, 16, 26, 37, 47, 113, 161, 190, 201, 207, 213, 235, 240, 264, 313, 321, 324, 325, 330, 331, 360 Nage, 3–5; central Nage, 4, 21; concept of metaphor. See also metaphor names, naming: animal names for human body parts, 11, 26, 338; animals named metaphorically after human body parts, 11; metaphorical names, 313–15, 321, 324, 330–1; monomial and binomial animal names, 240–1, 243, 276–8, 309, 326–7, 329, 367n4 naturalism, 13, 20, 27, 29, 51, 52, 358–9, 361, 369n4 neo-animism. See animism Ngadha, 25, 34, 65, 67, 89, 90, 102, 110, 112, 133, 138, 142, 153, 159, 183, 206, 248, 257, 276, 292, 296, 298, 299, 365–6n1 Ngadha-Lio language group, 25, 34 nitu. See spirits Nuer, 40–1, 42, 43, 49, 64, 67, 172, 184, 366n4

385

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 386

Ohnuki-Tierney, E., 41 omens: animals as, 98, 143, 144, 180, 184, 191, 200, 210, 220, 221, 223, 224, 324. See also augury onomatopoeia, 119, 169, 217, 222, 229, 236, 237, 239, 254, 259–60, 334 ontology, ontological pluralism, xii, 5, 12, 13, 27, 28–30, 38, 47, 49, 51–2, 271, 335, 336, 354, 355–64 oriole, 203–4, 223–4, 241, 321 Orwell, G., 310 owls, 164, 195, 219, 224–5, 323, 324, 331–2, 344; hawk-owl, 184, 225 Palmatier, R., 149, 240, 243–4, 279, 303, 311, 314, 367n3, 369n3 parallelism, parallelistic speech, 32, 83, 84, 92, 122, 156, 168, 210, 212, 216, 222, 266, 288–9, 308, 327, 329 pata néke (song genre), 31, 106, 130, 156, 171, 208, 209, 217, 231, 337, 343, 345 pata péle (Nage term for “metaphor”), 18, 30–6, 47, 50, 51, 365n1 (ch. 2) Peirce, C.S., 11 perspectivism, 46, 359 pets, pet animals, 96, 144, 145, 146, 155, 321 pigeons and doves, 19, 65, 162, 206, 208–9, 210–11, 212–14, 220, 225–7, 229–33, 235, 241, 312, 316, 318–19, 323, 328, 335, 347, 352, 367n4 pigs, 4, 11, 17, 33, 53, 54, 62, 64, 67, 69, 84, 85, 91–2, 100, 103–13, 122–3, 127, 152–3, 159, 160, 173, 181, 184, 195, 205, 252, 257, 272, 275–6, 297, 314, 315, 318, 320, 322, 326, 327, 328, 339, 339, 340, 346, 347, 351, 352, 357 plants: as Nage totems, 38; plant (botanical) metaphors, 39, 59, 85, 104, 127, 265, 333, 334; plant names incorporating animal metaphors, 10, 26, 34, 83, 313, 314, 315, 337 polysemy, 315, 316, 317 porcupines, 92, 97, 126–9, 130, 150, 153, 160, 195, 215, 227, 311, 312, 315, 328, 329, 337, 339, 340, 346, 357, 368n1 (ch. 8) prosody, prosodic effects, 17, 82, 86, 98, 127, 128, 133, 134, 144, 156, 157, 166, 168,

386

189, 193, 210, 216, 217, 227, 241, 267, 271, 285, 305, 327–8, 329 prototype theory, 7 proverbs, 23, 34, 55, 59–60, 127, 145, 176, 187, 191, 193, 201, 203, 211, 226, 266, 271, 308, 337–8, 352, 365n1 (ch. 2) pugilistic competitions (etu), 31, 62, 106, 116–17, 188, 202, 232, 266, 284, 287, 303, 352 quails, 19, 180, 211, 216, 226–8, 231, 232, 312, 328, 329, 331, 351 Radcliffe-Brown, A.R., 161 rainbow, 248 ranks. See social ranks rats and mice, 19, 53–4, 130, 132–40, 141, 142, 160, 227, 229, 246, 253, 307, 312–13, 314, 315, 318–19, 322, 329, 332, 340, 342, 344, 346, 349, 350, 356, 357, 368n1 (ch. 8). See also Giant rats; shrews reciprocal inversion, 46 Réndu (region), 116, 117, 125, 157–8, 266 rhyme. See prosody rice cultivation, 4, 48, 68, 70, 148–9, 281, 295, 301, 347 riddles, 307, 308 rites, ritual, 4, 6, 7, 11, 24, 37, 40, 44, 47, 50, 67, 69, 105, 107, 122, 207, 227, 234, 246, 287, 288, 313, 332; ritual language, 31, 34. See also hunting: annual ritual hunt; sacrifice Rosaldo, M., 41 sacrifice, sacrificial ritual, 4, 45, 48, 49, 50, 54, 55, 60, 67, 169, 184, 286, 287, 323, 359; sacrificial posts, 12, 24, 261, 275 scorpions, 302, 303, 307–8 scrubfowl, 228–9, 367n4 seaward or downstream direction (lau), 68–9, 92, 98, 124, 165, 191, 194, 210, 274 sex: sex differentiable terms, 63, 64, 89, 126–7, 133, 170, 181; sexual themes in metaphor, 13, 19, 31, 45, 58–9, 76–7, 81, 85, 89–90, 96, 98–100, 106–7, 133, 139, 156, 165, 174, 209, 217–18, 225, 256, 273, 296–7, 316, 343, 345, 346

INDEX

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 387

sheep, 63, 79–83, 86, 104, 160, 328, 340, 341, 342, 350 shellfish, 321 shrews, 130, 132, 133, 139–42, 160, 176, 312, 319, 340, 344, 350 Sikkanese, 34, 253 slugs, 11, 309, 319 snails, 308, 309, 317, 319 snakes, 10, 22, 157, 184, 229, 243–54, 256, 261, 276, 310, 312, 314, 315, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 329, 332, 339, 341, 344, 348, 350, 352, 368–9n4; bronzeback (snake), 157, 250–2, 277, 318, 322, 329, 348, 350, 351, 368–9n4; Flying snake, 276, 277; mock viper, 249, 314, 315; pipe snake, 247, 322; pit viper, 10, 182, 252–3, 277, 310, 361, 367n2; python, 10, 223, 252, 253, 274, 310, 313, 323; rat snake, 253, 277; Russell’s viper, 249, 250, 277, 338 So’a, 102, 112, 121, 126, 129, 258 social efficacy of animal metaphors. See metaphor social ranks, 4, 19–20, 45, 58–9, 64, 94, 134, 135, 220, 248, 297, 304, 334, 342 song, singing, 23, 31, 106, 165, 171, 188, 196, 198, 201, 208–9, 211, 220–1, 234, 239–40, 263, 281, 285, 292, 300, 303, 305, 308, 323, 324, 326, 327, 337; planting songs, 78, 166, 167, 168, 187, 191, 193, 199, 202, 206, 217, 222, 231, 235, 303, 305; songs of mourning, 43, 172, 177, 194, 209–10, 223, 225, 323; while circle-dancing, 92, 106, 130, 187, 217, 259–60, 266, 308; work songs, 196. See also pata néke soul, souls, 46, 67, 176–7, 191, 219–20, 225– 6, 240, 316, 322–3, 324, 331, 332, 336, 358, 359, 360, 361, 369n2, 369n4. See also spirits Sperber, D., 24, 39, 49–51 spiders, 112, 119–20, 279, 296, 302, 324, 349 spirits, spiritual or supernatural beings, 10, 45–8, 51, 55, 67, 105, 126, 169, 178, 184, 194, 213–14, 216, 219–20, 246, 250, 277, 313, 321, 322–4, 325, 330–3, 351, 359, 368n4; as inverted beings, 213, 332–3, 368n4. See also soul, souls stars, 113

INDEX

structuralism, 37, 38, 40, 41, 343 stubtail (bird), 199–200, 219, 233–4, 241, 321 Sumba, Sumbanese, 21, 107, 158, 227, 229, 264, 292, 369n1; Sumbanese concept of metaphor, 34, 35 sunbird, 123, 204, 234–5, 241, 321 swallows and swifts, 235, 357 symbolism: of animals, 3, 12, 20, 321–2, 330–1; cognitive approaches to, 24–5, 49–51, 321; and metaphor, 15, 26, 39, 50– 1, 363–4; and taxonomy, 44, 316; symbolic and utilitarian value, 324–6, 330; symbolic motivation of metaphors. See also motivation: cultural motivation synecdoche, 6, 11, 12, 43, 60, 92, 116, 298 synonymity: in animal metaphor, 16, 39, 70, 72, 74, 77, 110–11, 127, 131, 142, 144, 153, 211, 215, 235, 237, 245, 260, 269, 273, 274, 283 taboo, 40–1, 44, 50, 126, 146, 158, 247, 250, 298, 321, 331, 332, 341 tadpole, 268, 272, 278, 319, 348, 368n3 (ch. 6). See also frogs Tambiah, S., 39, 41 tattooing, 12 taxonomy, folk taxonomy, 9–10, 45, 53, 64, 101, 111, 112, 119, 130, 135, 138, 191, 196, 205, 221, 243, 247, 249, 261, 268, 279, 280, 281, 285, 304, 313, 314, 316, 325–6, 328 termites, 298, 300, 319 Thais, 39, 41 toddy, 106, 123, 142, 169, 173, 175, 235. See also Arenga palm totemism, 9, 37–9, 42, 43, 161, 334–5, 356, 359, 366n3; in Nage, 38 transformation: beliefs in animal transformation, 54, 67, 143, 240, 264, 268, 317, 360 Turner, V., 23 turtles, 229, 275–6, 314, 347 Tylor, E. B., 358 ‘Ua, 82, 86, 225, 227, 229, 272, 328, 342 universals, xii, 12, 209, 273, 327, 364 urine, urination, 55, 74, 94, 102, 197, 331, 339

387

forth interior.qxp_Layout 1 2019-09-24 4:45 PM Page 388

utilitarian motivation of metaphors. See motivation: cultural motivation utilitarianism in anthropology, 325–6 Valeri, V., 39–40 Verheijen, J.A.J., 67, 102, 112, 113, 120, 121, 126, 138, 183, 248, 258 vipers. See snakes Viveiros de Castro, 30, 46, 52, 358, 359, 361 war, warfare, 69–70, 124, 362 wasps, 112, 279, 280, 283–5, 309, 319, 347, 348 water buffalo. See buffalo waterhen, 11, 23, 101, 211, 237–9 weaving, 12, 368–9n4; textile motifs, 281–2

388

West, H.G., 46 whistler (bird), 223, 227, 239–40, 321, 324 wife-givers and wife-takers, 4, 62, 78, 87, 110–11, 169, 173, 175–6, 178, 181, 185, 283, 342, 347, 366n4 Willis, R., 366n3 witches, 9, 46, 67, 69, 92–3, 115, 164, 180, 184, 190, 192, 194, 219, 221, 225, 307, 322, 323, 324, 332; as inverted beings, 163–4 witu tui bird, 236, 321 wood-carving. See carving Yoruba, 45, 337 zoomorphism, 356

INDEX