Re: Conculturish question Re: OFF : updated tunu grammar

Paul a =E9crit :

<<<<<
I have to take issue here:  Wouldn't a taboo specifically make someone "unfi=
t
for eating"?  Transgression of taboo (afaik) tends to give the stigma of
"unclean", "outcast", "unworthy".  Most cannibal cultures I'm aware of eat=20
high
status people, not low status people, (that is, if they care about the statu=
s=20
of
the victim).  Do the tunus make status distinctions when eating humans? (or
indeed, with any animal?)
>>>>>
this is a very wide question. tunuans are very legalistic
so inspecting who can eat whom, when and how is fairly long to=20
explain here. the most important rules are the following :

(i) you can't eat someone alive (a recent improvement) ;
(ii) when you kill someone, you must eat (some of) him ;
(iii) you can eat someone you didn't kill ;
(iv) you can't kill someone you can't eat ;
(v) you can't eat someone you can't kill ;
(vi) you can't kill your relatives ;
(vii) you can't eat foreigners ;
(viii) you can kill whomever breaks a taboo ;
(ix) you must wash your hands before and after eating.

however (viii) is oddly construed as allowing to kill and eat
a foreigner breaking a taboo in contradiction to (vii).
but as japanese explorator Toire Otearai reports it, this is only due to
"tunuans' strong culinary curiosity".

that's why i would not post any tunuan receipe like Steg was thinking
of doing it with snake trees.

<<<<<
I think Wenetaic is going to try and exist with neither (true) copula nor
passivity.  If a man bites a dog, it's a single event in semantic space, to=20=
a
Wenetaar, "looking at it from another direction" would seem pointless and
tautological.  I'll probably have to give in and accept some auxiliaries,
though.  You've set me thinking... more later...
>>>>>
you made me think too. actually i never use passive,
except for verbs that have no specific result, agent, patient, etc.
like "to hit" (different from "to make a blow").
the reason is that former tunu grammar was like weneatic :

"to-bucket by-water done.by-man"

so i understand what you mean.

i know 2 natlangs that have no passive and
another natlang that uses the plain verb + hia :
ua hohoni hia 'oia e te 'urii
PAST bite PASS him NOM the dog

so i changed tunu today by making indirect passive as "verb + wo" ("by"),
which eliminates the heavy passive voice (like "poco" > "po-poco-poco") :

tata opoco tilu.=20
me learn sciences.=20
i learn sciences.=20

tata opoco tilu wo moto popocong.=20
me get-learn sciences by man teaching.=20
i am taught sciences by the teacher.=20

tilu pocopoco wo moto popocong we tata.=20
sciences be-lesson by man teaching to me.=20
sciences are taught by the teacher to me.=20

poco : a lesson
poco-poco : to get learned ("to be a lesson to")
o-poco : to learn
po-poco : to teach

tice : hitting
ti-tice : to hit
iti-tice : to be hit

nose : blade
nose-nose : to cut as blade
no-nose : to cut with blade
ono-nose : to be cut with/by blade

wo =3D by (agentive)=20
we =3D to (indirect object)=20
wi =3D in, at, by (locative)=20
=20
mathias