Proverbs

[Pamela Munro]

I think (as probably most of you do too) you can have obscure metaphors
without proverbs. For instance, in Chickasaw (sorry; I venture a bit outside
Siouan) when you see a certain type of cloud / sky formation you can say,
"Satan is beating his wife." (Sorry; this is not a family show.) I would not
call this a proverb. However, I think it's clearly obscure / metaphorical.

Pam



Koontz John E wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 rlarson at unlnotes01.unl.edu wrote:
> > I wonder if we shouldn't try to refine what we mean by a proverb?  Is a
> > proverb just any standard saying?  Is it an admonition?  Does it have to
> > be metaphorical?
>
> I guess it would also be worth while knowing if there are any typological
> or distributional studies of proverbs.
>
> For myself, I wouldn't think that any standard saying (or idiom of
> sentence length?) would be a proverb.  Some might be simply admired
> formulations, like "Give me liberty or give me death!" as opposed, say, to
> "Live free or die!"  Many of these might be fragmentary quotations of some
> larger work, as in this case.  I suppose some might be more or less
> anonymous or at least unquoted - customary formulations like "I'm glad to
> see you." or lengthy idioms - no good example occurs!  I would think,
> however, that it would have to be, if not admonitory, at least advisory or
> procedural, and if not metaphorical, perhaps normally somewhat obscure.
> However, I could see obscurity or metaphorical qualities as a stylistic
> feature that might not be universal.
>
> > If we find proverbs to be almost non-existent in some cultural
> > regions, and overpowering in others, then perhaps their presence or
> > absence is an indicator of differences in the historical life
> > circumstances of the people living in these respective regions.
>
> I'd agree that that's a likely hypothesis, but my understanding is that it
> is widely agreed that the Mississippian cultures were in many cases
> chiefdoms.  Their widespread demise seems to have accompanied early
> contact, with the main early factor being massive die-offs due to mingling
> of disease pools.  I'm sure there's some debate about timing and
> causation.  I've also heard it argued that as contact intensified the fur
> trade caused a definite shift in the East and Plains away from
> horticulture and toward hunting, as well as largely eliminating such
> indigenous industries as flint knapping and pottery.

--
Pamela Munro
Professor, Department of Linguistics, UCLA
UCLA Box 951543
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543 USA
http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/humnet/linguistics/people/munro/munro.htm