SV: query: taboo against 3 people in picture

[Seino van Breugel]

A Hong Kong friend just told me that the reason for the taboo is that the
chakras of, as he called it, fires from the shoulders of the person in the
middle are not covered by the persons on either side of him/her. The
chakras "switched off" means misfortune for tha.middle person. I hope this
explanation helps to solve the mistery.
Seino van Breugel
On Feb 22, 2012 9:59 PM, <vfriedm at uchicago.edu> wrote:

> Yes. But then again, the popular prohibition is against being precisely
> the third person.
>
> ---- Original message ----
> >Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:53:38 +0900
> >From: David Gil <gil at eva.mpg.de>
> >Subject: Re: SV: query: taboo against 3 people in picture
> >To: vfriedm at uchicago.edu
> >Cc: LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
> >
> >Ah but again, if I understand the taboo correctly (my experience with
> >cigarettes and trenches being rather limited), four on a match would be
> >even worse, right?
> >
> >> Consider also the taboo against three on a match (for lighting
> cigarettes).
> >> I have heard that the belief dates from WWI trench warfare.  The
> explanation was that by the time the third person had lit up, the enemy had
> time to aim and fire.
> >> But the taboo itself was well known when i was in college.
> >> Victor
> >>
> >> ---- Original message ----
> >>
> >>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 21:37:25 +0900
> >>> From: Discussion List for ALT <LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG> (on
> behalf of David Gil <gil at EVA.MPG.DE>)
> >>> Subject: Re: SV: query: taboo against 3 people in picture
> >>> To: LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
> >>>
> >>> Jan,
> >>>
> >>> Yes, even Indonesian has similar expressions.  However, in the case of
> >>> 'three is a crowd' and such, I think the implicature is clearly that
> >>> four (and above) would be even worse, whereas in the case of the
> >>> 3-people-in-picture taboo, a common way of solving the problem is to
> >>> invite an additional person into the picture -- the taboo is
> >>> specifically for three.
> >>>
> >>> David
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Dear David,
> >>>>
> >>>> Hailing from a different part of the world, your query made me think
> of such phrases as 'Three is a crowd' and 'Ménage á trois', which suggest
> that three is one too many.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>>
> >>>> Jan
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
> >>>> Från: Discussion List for ALT [mailto:
> LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG] För David Gil
> >>>> Skickat: den 22 februari 2012 13:14
> >>>> Till: LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
> >>>> Ämne: query: taboo against 3 people in picture
> >>>>
> >>>> Dear all,
> >>>>
> >>>> Apologies for posting a non-linguistic query, but I'm interested in
> checking whether the non-linguistic feature in question correlates with a
> particular linguistic area, so perhaps all you field linguists out there
> can contribute some of your experiences.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> In many parts of mainland and insular Southeast Asia stretching into
> New Guinea, there is a taboo against three people posing for a photo.  One
> or two is fine, four, five and up is fine, but three is a no no.  In some
> places the taboo is strong, while in others it's just something people joke
> about.  Sometimes it is said that the person in the middle will meet
> misfortune or die.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have encountered this taboo in Cambodia, Sumatra, Borneo, Palawan,
> Luzon, Sulawesi, Maluku, and on a recent trip to the Baliem Valley in the
> Papuan highlands.  (Though not in Java or the lesser Sunda isles.) The
> areal distribution suggests that the taboo must be older than the advent of
> photography, perhaps extending back to drawings and paintings; the
> antiquity of the taboo is further supported by its presence amongst the
> Papuan highland Dani, whose first contact with the outside world was only
> in the 1940s (and it seems implausible that they would have picked up the
> taboo since then).
> >>>>
> >>>> My question is: where else is such a taboo present?  Are you familiar
> >>>> with it from any other parts of the world?   I would greatly
> appreciate
> >>>> both positive and negative data (the latter always being harder to
> obtain reliably).  I am particularly interested in delimiting the extent of
> the area listed above:  does the taboo exist further east in New Guinea and
> into the Pacific?  What about north into China, or west into South Asia?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>> David
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> David Gil
> >>>>
> >>>> Department of Linguistics
> >>>> Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology Deutscher Platz 6,
> D-04103 Leipzig, Germany
> >>>>
> >>>> Telephone: 49-341-3550321 Fax: 49-341-3550119
> >>>> Email: gil at eva.mpg.de
> >>>> Webpage:  http://www.eva.mpg.de/~gil/
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> --
> >>> David Gil
> >>>
> >>> Department of Linguistics
> >>> Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
> >>> Deutscher Platz 6, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany
> >>>
> >>> Telephone: 49-341-3550321 Fax: 49-341-3550119
> >>> Email: gil at eva.mpg.de
> >>> Webpage:  http://www.eva.mpg.de/~gil/
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >David Gil
> >
> >Department of Linguistics
> >Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
> >Deutscher Platz 6, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany
> >
> >Telephone: 49-341-3550321 Fax: 49-341-3550119
> >Email: gil at eva.mpg.de
> >Webpage:  http://www.eva.mpg.de/~gil/
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20120222/410ce2de/attachment.htm>