SV: query: taboo against 3 people in picture

[Seino van Breugel]

In my last email, "not covered" should be "covered", so without the word
"not".
Seino van Breugel
On Feb 22, 2012 10:16 PM, "Seino van Breugel" <seinobreugel at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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/20120222/3cc0d750/attachment.htm>