Fw: Edgar: doublets, bifrasismos, difrasismos

[Joanna M. Sanchez]

   My earlier message appears not to have been successfully received; I therefore reiterate:

 Couplets are, as many have pointed out, a feature of ritual languages, and as such, their referential values are sometimes obscured by convention and design.  When this is the case, meaning is likely linked to some feature of ideology.

    I would say that the two elements of atl tlachinolli- water and fire/'burning'- while mutually exclusive in nature (as pointed out, one overwhelms the other, violently releasing the ephemeral 'steam'), are maintained in the blood of the human body, having properties of both liquid and heat. This confounds the apparent exclusivity of the elements.  

    I therefore sense that this couplet has two main referential loci- principally: 
       1) opposition- an inherent dimension of conflict; dry/wet seasons could relate to this oppositional dynamic;
 and 2) a reference to blood (human liquid counterpart to water/rain) as the offering element prescribed by the 'covenant' to feed the divine powers- this substance is manifested through warfare, and is considered an essential component of the hydraulic cycle (see Monaghan 1995 Covenants with Earth and Rain).  

    About the atl tepetl pairing, as hills are believed to be receptacles for water, they make good settlement locations. A  more esoteric reading might entail seeing hills as dwelling places of ancestral and rain spirits, and water, of course 'divine' water, as the enabler of all life.  Joanna

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: micc2 
  To: NAHUAT-L at LISTS.UMN.EDU 
  Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 3:04 AM
  Subject: Re: Edgar: doublets, bifrasismos, difrasismos


  the effects of water and fire have nothing to do with this disfrasismo except that:

  when fire overwhelms water, hot (and sometimes violent) steam is sent out....
  when water overcomes fire, it causes flames to shoot out as it puts the fire out... and again  steam (and smoke  this time) are sent out violently.

  it is this great release of violence and energy that symbolize war, not how water or fire were used in battle.

  mario cuauhtlehcoc
  www.mexicayotl.org


  ANTHONY APPLEYARD wrote: 
 --- Geoff Davis <mixcoatl at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
  ... Here are two common examples:
in atl in tlachinolli - "water and fire" - war
in xochitl in cuicatl - "flower and song" - poetry
    
Andrews's book translates difrasismos as e.g. "It is a flower and it is
a song".

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"?

Citlalyani

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20040903/317e462b/attachment.htm>