Re: Numerology & "Letterology"

At 4:42 PM -0500 2/3/03, Karapcik, Mike wrote:
>        I don't practice acrophonology. I just have an interest in
>divinatory techniques of different cultures and religions.
The Cahuilla Indians of southern California used a pair of string figures for
divining the sex of an unborn child. Both string figures are made using the
same construction method, but in the construction of the figure, it is common
for one string to be transposed with another; this transposition is not under
the control of the person making the string figure and is essentially random
(well, not quite; I can manage to get the desired figure -- Boy or Girl -- with
about 80% accuracy). I learned the figure from a Chemehuevi woman.

The Navajos make the same two string figures, but their construction method
removes the ambiguity of the Cahuilla figures and makes it possible to reliably
produce the desired figure. Check out
http://dine.sanjuan.k12.ut.us/string_games/games/navajo/stand_meas_worm.html
for the Boy (which the Navajos call the Standing Measuring Worm) and
http://dine.sanjuan.k12.ut.us/string_games/games/navajo/owl1.html for the Girl
(which the Navajos call the Owl). In fact, the whole site
http://dine.sanjuan.k12.ut.us/string_games/index.html is quite remarkable and
worth exploring.

ObConlang: The Miapimoquitch enjoyed making string figures. Many of their figures are
similar to the Navajo string games, but I have found other figures similar to
the Eskimo and Kwakiutl figures which have been documented. The Miapimoquitch
term for making string figures is ['paD1 'luG1,hiSimbi:], parsed as follows:

pat1         luk1  -hisi   -mpi
continuously weave -string -with.the.hand

It is a complex predicate, which means that person and transitivity are marked on
the first element, while phase and number are marked on the second. The bound
morphemes -hisi and -mpi are so-called "lexical" suffixes.

Dirk
--
Dirk Elzinga                                               Dirk_Elzinga@byu.edu

"It is important not to let one's aesthetics interfere with the appreciation of
fact." - Stephen Anderson