Edgar: doublets, bifrasismos, difrasismos

[Geoff Davis]

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 07:52:24 +0100, ANTHONY APPLEYARD
<a.appleyard at btinternet.com> wrote:
> Andrews's book translates difrasismos as e.g. "It is a
> flower and it is a song".

That's another valid translation. :D

The same difrasismo used above may appear translated as
"the flower, the song," "it is a flower, it is a song," or "flower
and song."  Or, perhaps even other ways.

One sees these different translations because English and
Nahuatl differ substantially in structure.  In Nahuatl, virtually
any absolutive element can be interpreted as a stand-alone
sentence.  Depending upon context, it may not make a lot
of sense if the most literal translation is made.

> In "it is water and it is fire" used to mean "it is war", I know that
> war all too often involves setting buildings on fire, but where does
> water come into it? Does it refer to war canoes? Or does the
> phrase refer to water and fire being incompatible "elements"?

Personally, I always felt it was the dynamic opposition of these
two things that symbolized war.

-Geoff