Frank Hamilton Cushing and Zuni Ontology

In a like manner, the Zuni terms for colors point to objects, but often by means of phrases using a comparative particle (ikna), which is a reference to a cultural norm.  Color terms form a significant part of the Zuni lexicon and frequently occur in texts (both myth and texts descriptive of daily life) and are pervasive in art and ritual.  There is no general term for color in the Zuni lexicon and the only indication of an abstract term for color is where the color has changed or designated as an unnatural property of the thing (jeli or heli)[36].  To the Zuni the power inherent in an image (assuming color to be an image) is its ability to depict vital aspects of the physical world in relation to their "specificity-their ability to represent living beings"[37].  Thus, in the absence of a general term for color, color terms have no category sui generis, but will refer to objects belonging to a separate taxonomic structure, often referring with religious connotation to the wide category of beings, which is inclusive of humans, animals, ceremonial objects, spirits (Koko, Kachinas)[38], and possibly plants, insects, and natural concretions as well (corn maidens, kokopelli, or the twins of Towayalane).  The similarities and dissimilarities in a contrast between the Zuni and Navajo, and their own inherent "continuities and discontinuities" show the cross-cultural implications for comparability of semantic categories where categories are culturally defined and a manifestation of a Weltanschauung[39].  The problem of a Chomskyan analysis of the Zuni language has been noted[40] and it is apparent that the best approach to the language is one with a modified relativistic attitude.

 The Zuni perceive of no phenomenon that is exclusively physical.  Their ontological taxonomic structure is permeated with animate matter and their language has no means of explicitly expressing the distinction between the animate and inanimate.  As Cushing had pointed out, and later Walker in his taxonomy of Zuni terms, the category of 'beings' has no distinct boundaries.  There are no types of beings, but rather, degrees of being. Young also noted in the results of card sorting that figures with both human and animal characteristics were sometimes grouped as either, but were less specifiable as specific beings[41].  In contrast to an ontology such as the Cartesian cogito where it can be assumed that everything external to the subject is physical, an ontology that admits of an interrelated sameness throughout animate matter would assume, a priori, universal subjectivity or other minds, however one wished to describe the intellectual and individuating function. Thus, objectivity, or more precisely, the resultant intersubjectivity which is evident in analysis of their usage of their semantic components seems to indicate that the distinction between the ontological and the epistemological is analogous to the confluence of their cosmology and aesthetics in the beautiful and the dangerous, and is for the most part logically imperceptible (non-distinct).

Ontologically and epistemically, for the Zuni, logos is deeply embedded in substance.  As Young states, "...Zuni perceptions and interpretations of rock art reveal much about the Zuni world view..."[42].  Clarification is needed in regard to this statement however, for while "perceptions and interpretations" may be revealed conceptually and have a strong intersubjective basis visually (ostensively), the lack of a naming process indicates the strong presence of contextual implications where non-verbal expression is preferable when reference is indeterminate.  In this regard a deviant utterance may be the manifestation of the dangerous and subsequently the aesthetic is expressed as a communal act of appreciation visually.

There are some points to be made here in regard to the naming process; 1) because intersubjective objectivity can be revealed conceptually and non-verbally a linguistic relativism approach is preferable to a linguistic universalism, 2) given the extent of metaphor and analogy in reference to particular objects or figures in Zuni language and ritual a possible world semantics is inappropriate, and 3) Young's assertion that "one cannot separate Zuni sacred and secular life"[43] is incorrect in view of non-verbal aesthetic expression.

Concerning (1), for the language universalist the ineffability thesis of semantics states that one cannot discuss the relationships that constitute the meanings of words and other expressions of language because it is an inescapable intermediary between me and the world, and one with which I cannot dispense, meaning that I cannot "step outside my language (and the conceptual system it embodies) and view it from the outside"[44].  The universality of language to the language universalist means that language is "inescapable".  Everything we say and (according to some philosophers) think presupposes the one language we are using, including the semantic relations in virtue of which it can be used to say something.  We can only say things about our language by using that which we suppose in order to do so, i.e. our own language.  Language of the user constitutes the language user's universe.  What lies outside of the language is not only inexpressible, but is meaningless.

The totality of the relationships that constitute the meanings of words and other expressions of language is semantics.  The relation between simple objects and their names is presupposed in all use of language and because of this we have to treat the actual objects as existing necessarily and as necessarily exhausting the entire realm of all possible objects[45].  These relationships that are the links between language and reality cannot, according to universalist, be rationalized for "semantic ideas can only be conveyed non-verbally...non-conceptually. They rely on an unexpressed and unexplainable preconceptual Vorwissen" [46].

Herein lies a crucial distinction, for Young notes that where ambiguity is present in both meaning and form, "the power invoked through particular images...may at times be metaphorical or ambiguous, but their form rarely is" and power is the power to invoke narrative of myth and the time of the beginning.[47]  Young's specific meaning of "form" is basically that of shapes and is representative of universality.  If the formal aspect of an object is what can be said to be true of it a priori, then the form of simple objects governs the way in which these objects can be combined with each other (elements of design) and form complex logical forms (patterns of design).  If a culture's ontological taxonomic structure admits of an animate matter, or more precisely, if the culture's language has no means of expressing explicitly the distinction between the animate and the inanimate, and a totality of relations between things is referred to as a sameness of all things, then it would seem to admit of an a prior intersubjectivity in these relations.  Semantic ideas are conveyed conceptually for "the power inherent in those images that depict being associated by the Zuni with vital aspects of the physical world is related to their specificity-their ability to 'represent' " living beings"[48].  For the Zuni, personification is inherent in the substance of animate matter and has existed since "the beginning".  Ontology is then relative to personalization (as distinct from personification), individuation and context, where 'to be', in Hintikka's terms, is to be the object of a search[49] and to "find" as an act of quantification may be better served by the verb "to produce"[50].  "To be" is to be somewhere and is a relation that concedes to the eternal possibility of an existence.  Thus, when an image may be recognized and categorized according to its form, even when labeled as "unknown" by the lack of content, it is still possible to convey semantic ideas conceptually according to principles that inhibit the tendency to render a deviant utterance, and can further be conveyed ostensively, where knowledge and aesthetic appreciation is dependent upon one's cultural assimilation.

                                                                                                                         Next Page>>>

Notes