Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Wiley and Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Man.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
KWOMA TERMINOLOGY AND MARRIAGE
ALLIANCE: THE'OMAHA' PROBLEM REVISITED
Ross BOWDEN
La TrobeUniversity
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
746 ROSS BOWDEN
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ROSS BOWDEN 747
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
748 ROSS BOWDEN
relatively stable wife-giving and wife-taking groups. Thus Dumont remarks 'I
submit that in societies where there are [positive] marriage regulations ...
marriage should be considered as part of a marriage alliance institution running
through generations' (1971: I85; also Buchler & Selby I968: 130, 134). But
where positive marriage rules are lacking, alliance models are thought to be less
appropriate and inapplicable (I968: 134). Now Kwoma, like most other Papua
New Guinea societies (see Forge 1971: 139), do not possess positive marriage
rules, and do not regularly repeat marriages, symmetrically or asymmetrically,
between 'wife-giving' and 'wife-taking' groups. For this reason (Cook I969:
114), few anthropologists have attempted to approach New Guinea societies
with alliance models in mind. Moreover, Kwoma formally prohibit the rep-
etition of marriages, symmetrically or asymmetrically, between affinally linked
patrilines (but not exogamous clans as wholes) for several generations once a
marriage has been contracted. The effect of this is that affinal ties are widely
dispersed, rather than concentrated, between groups. The absence of positive
rules notwithstanding, however, I will argue that individualKwoma marriages
can be seen to establish enduring alliances between affinally linked patrilines
(even though no further marriages may take place between them for several
generati,ons), and that the structure of these alliances is conceptualised in the
cross-generational mergings in the terminology.
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ROSS BOWDEN 749
1940), clans also acted largely independently in war. A single clan could, and
commonly did, carry out raids against enemy groups without warning the other
clans in its own tribe, and occasionally a clan might avenge an injury by another
within the same tribe by getting an enemy group to attack the clan in question.
Warfaredid not take place between clans in the same tribe, but such groups were
(and still are) widely believed to practise homicidal sorcery against one another,
and men openly describe the members of all clans other than their own,
including those in the same tribe, as 'enemies' (ow).
Clans that possess the same, or similar, sets of totems make up named,
dispersed, non-exogamous totemic divisions. Membership in these divisions,
combined with membership in localised clans, provides the broadest
framework for determining the application of kin terms. For instance, a person
refers to all first ascending generation male members of his (or her) own totemic
division as 'father' (apok), irrespective of the presence or absence of actual or
putative agnatic ties between ego and alter. Similarly, a male speaker refers to all
same-generation natal female members of his own totemic division as 'sisters'
(mowoy),irrespective of the presence or absence of actual or putative agnatic ties
between ego and the females in question. Kin categories such as apok ('F') and
mowoy('Z') can be qualified on the basis of clan membership by the terms siikiin
and nobo,which mean 'true' (or 'actual')and 'classificatory' respectively. Thus, a
man refers to all first ascending generation male members of his own clan as
'true fathers' (apoksiikiin), and to equivalent-generation male members of other
clans in the same division as 'classificatory fathers' (noboapok). Again, a man
refers to all same-generation natal female members of his own clan as 'true
sisters' (mowoy siikiin), and to all equivalent-generation female members of
other clans in the same division as 'classificatory sisters' (nobo mowoy). In
conversation, people occasionally restrict such terms as apoksiikiin ('true father')
and mowoysiikiin ('true sister') to actualfather and actual sister. But all agree that
such terms properly refer to members of clans as wholes (of appropriate
genealogical levels), and not to specific individuals. Thus mowoysiikiin properly
refers to all same-generation natal female members of one's own clan, and
not, primarily, actual sister. Actual sister, in fact, is not terminologically
distinguished from other same-generation clanswomen.3
All fertile marriages establish asymmetrical exchange relationships, and
wider social and political alliances, between the male members of wife-giving
and wife-taking patrilines that endure for up to four generations (fig. i; cf. Gell
1975: 69 sq.; Lewis 1975: 27 sq.; I980: 90 sq.). In what I refer to here as the first
generation of an affinal alliance, a formal (i.e. obligatory) asymmetrical ex-
change relationship obtains between the husband (the wife-taker) on the one
hand, and male members of the wife's brother's (the wife-giver's) patriline of the
wife's brother'sgenerationand below on the other. In the second generation an
identical formal asymmetrical exchange relationship and wider alliance obtains
between the, wife-taker's sons (initially the children of both sex) on the one
hand, and the same male members of the wife-giving line on the other. In the
third and fourth generations a similar but informal (i.e. optional) relationship
obtains between the wife-taker's son's sons, and son's son's sons, respectively
on the one hand, and the surviving male members of the same wife-giving line
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
750 ROSS BOWDEN
on the other. In all four generations the alliance is underpinned and maintained
by an asymmetrical exchange of food and wealth-objects-food going to
members of the wife-taking line, and wealth to the wife-giving line-and a
symmetrical exchange of various domestic, social and political services. For the
duration of an alliance, furthermore, no additional marriages may take place
between the same two lines. This entails, for male ego, marriage that is
prohibited with a member of WB's (and BWB's), MB's, FMB's and FFMB's
lines, as well as with the husband's sister, daughter, son's daughter, son's son s
daughter and son's son's son's daughter of same and ascending generation
female members of own line (e.g. ZHZ, ZD, FZD, FFZSD).4 It should be
emphasised, however, that these prohibitions apply only to specific descent lines
and not to clans as wholes. Hence a man is formally prohibited from marrying,
say, a member of his MB's patriline (e.g. MBD or MBSD) but is not prohibited
from marrying a more distantly related member ofMB's clan (e.g. MFFBSSD) .'
Before examining the Kwoma terminology, and the way in which it ex-
presses the structure of these alliances, I comment further on the structure of
affinal exchange relationships themselves.
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
GENERATION TERMS USED BY: A B C
+I ATOKW ATOKW WALAGA
' 4~ (NYIJOKW) (NYIJA) (NYIJA SOB)
o A _ NIBEL MAGWAPA YEY
F (MOWOY) (RUWEY) (NYIJA)
-I B WEALTH G NEL MAGWAPA YEY
(YAKW) (RUWEY) (NYIJA)
ERVICE
-2 C H NEL MAGWAPA YEY
T FOOD I T- (YAKW) (RUWEY) (NYIJA)
-3 D NEL MAGWAPA YEY
(YAKW) (RUWEY) (NYIJA)
-4 E ETC. ETC. ETC.
FIGURE I. Terms of reference used by members of a wife-taking line (A, B, C and D) for m
H, I). Thus, A refers to F as nibel, and G, H, and I as nel. Terms in parentheses
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
752 ROSS BOWDEN
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ROSS BOWDEN 753
(as often happens) the exchange relationship that previously obtained between
her husband and her brother is not brought to an end, but continues obligatorily
for the remainderof the woman'slife between her husband on the one hand and her
brother's son (or clan equivalent if her brother has no son) on the other. At the
wife's brother's-death, that is, the wife's brother's son takes over (inherits) the
wife's brother's role in the exchange relationship. The wife's brother's son is
now formally required to 'look after' the wife and her husband (alter's father's
sister and father's sister's husband) in exactly the same way as his father (the
wife's brother) did before him; he is required regularly to visit them, to give
them gifts of food, and to assist the husband with such activities as gardening
and housebuilding. The husband (the wife-taker) is required periodically to
'pay' (tokitow)for these services with small quantities of shell valuables-just as
he 'paid' the wife's brother while the latter was still alive. Traditionally a wife's
brother's son and father's sister's husband (following the wife's brother's death)
also acted as allies in war. When the wife eventually dies it is now her brother's
son who becomes the formal recipient of the death payment. As his father would
have before him, the wife's brother's son retains approximately half of the shell
valuables received and distributes the remainder among his father's surviving
'true brothers' and his own categorically-defined 'true brothers'. In the event of
a married woman outliving both her brother and brother's son (as occasionally
happens), the wife's brother's (and wife's brother's son's) role in the exchange
relationship is taken over (inherited) in turn by the wife's brother's son's son.
The wife's brother's son's son is now obliged to 'look after' the woman and her
husband (alter's father's father's sister, and father's father's sister's husband) in
the same way as his father (the wife's brother's son) and father's father (the wife's
brother) did before him; and on the wife's death he now becomes the formal
recipient of the woman's death payment (which he shares with his father's
father's, father's and own 'true brothers'). If a married woman outlives her
brother, therefore, her brother's role in the affinal exchange relationship is taken
over by her brother's son, and on the latter's death, by her brother's son's son
andso on downthewife-givingline. Indeed, informants state explicitly that there is
no theoretical limit to the number of descendinggeneration male members of a
wife's brother's patriline who can become involved in an affinal exchange
relationship, since the duration of the alliance is determined not by how long
individual male members of the wife's brother's line live but solely by how long
the wife lives.
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
754 ROSS BOWDEN
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ROSS BOWDEN 755
an ally in war. In return for these services the sister's son is required periodically
to 'pay' his mother's brother's son with small quantities of shell valuables-just
as he 'paid' his mother's brother with shell valuables while the latter was still
alive. When the sister's son eventually dies it is now the mother's brother's son
who becomes the formal recipient of the death payment. The mother's brother's
son retains only approximately half of the wealth received, and distributes the
remainder among his father's and his own 'true brothers', all of whom are for-
mally entitled to receive a share of the payment.
In the event of a sister's son outliving both his mother's brother and mother's
brother's son (as occasionally happens) the exchange relationship is again not
terminated, but continues obligatorily between the sister's son on the one hand
and the mother's brother's son's son on the other. The mother's brother's son's
son is now formally obliged to 'look after' the sister's son (alter's father's
father's sister's son) just as his father (the mother's brother's son) and his father's
father (the mother's brother) did before him; and on the sister's son's death it is
he who now becomes the formal recipient of the death payment (which he
shares with his father's father's, father's and own 'true brothers'). In the event of
the sister's son outliving his mother's brother's son's son as well, the latter's role
in the exchange relationship is taken over (inherited) by the mother's brother's
son s son s son in turn, andso on downtheMB'spatriline.Indeed, informants state
emphatically that there is no theoretical limit to the number of descending
generation male members of the mother's brother's patriline who could become
involved in the exchange relationship, since the duration of the alliance is
determined not by how long individual male members of the mother's brother's
line live, but solely by how long the sister's son lives. What begins in the second
generation of an alliance, therefore, as an asymmetrical exchange relationship
between a mother's brother and sister's son, is transformed on the mother's
brother's death into an exchange relationship between a mother's brother's son
and father's sister's son (that is, an exchange relationship between male cross-
cousins or the sons of brothers-in-law); and on the mother's brother's son's
death, into an exchange relationship between a mother's brother's son's son and
father's father's sister's son's son, and so on.
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
756 ROSS BOWDEN
informally entitled to give his ZSSS small gifts of food and receive small
payments in return. In terms of wealth, however, the exchange relationship in
the third and fourth generations of an allianceis much less important than it is in
the first two generations, for members of a FMB's and FFMB's lines receive no
share of the ZSS's, or ZSSS's, puberty or death payments. These go exclusively
to the subject's MB's patriline.
Following the death of third descending generation male members of the
original wife-taking line (that is, the ZSSS or D in fig. i), all formal and informal
exchange relationships between the two lines come to an end. At this level they
are now said to be 'unrelated' (akiirama), and fourth (and lower) descending
generation members of the wife-taking line employ no relationship terms for
surviving members of the wife-giving line (and vice versa). It is only at this
level, moreover, that a further marriage may take place between the two lines.
Men say that such a marriage should ideally take place in the opposite direction
from the original marriage, to 'balance' the exchange of women between the
two lines.
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ROSS BOWDEN 757
WF, and refers to the latter by a term that has no implications as far as exchange
rights are concerned, can also be correlated with the structure of an affinal
alliance, since WF, as we have seen, neither holds nor stands to inherit exchange
rights of any kind in ego's wife.
A man refers to his WBS and other descendinggeneration male members of
WB's patriline as nel. A male speaker, that is, cross-generationally merges WBS,
WBSS, WBSSS etc. Since all these persons use a constant reciprocal, a male
speaker also cross-generationally merges FZ, FFZ FFFZ and so on. A man also
uses the term nel to refer to all other male members ofWB's clarnofWBS'sgener-
ation and below, all of whom reciprocally refer to ego as yakw. The use of a
single term cross-generationally for WBS and other descending generation male
members ofWB's patriline can be correlatedwith the social fact that all these per-
sons occupy, actually or potentially, structurallyequivalent roles vis-d-visego in
the exchange relationship that obtains between a man and male members of his
WB's patriline: they either hold, or stand to inherit, identical (primary) ex-
change rights in ego's wife (the exchange rights held initially by WB). Used
cross-generationally for second and lower descending generation male mem-
bers of WB's patriline, there-fore,nel denotes persons who stand to succeed to
the WB's role in the first generation of an affinal exchange relationship. Kwoma
explicitly account for the cross-generational merging of these kin-types in this
way. The use of the same term, nel, for all other second and lower descending
generation male members of WB's clan as a whole can also be correlatedwith the
structure of this exchange relationship, since all persons so denoted similarly
stand to inherit (secondary) exchange rights in ego's wife, namely a right to
receive a (minor) share of her marriage and death payments. Furthermore, used
for second and lower descending generation male members of WB's clan nel (i. e.
'true nel') exclusively denotes men who stand to inherit such rights, primarily or
secondarily. 1
The correlation between the structure of an affinal exchange relationship and
the cross-generational features of the Kwoma terminology is displayed even
more clearly in the second generation of an alliance. Here the exchange
relationship is defined by a single pair of terms: magwapa('MB') and ruwey
('ZS').
A man (B in the figure above) refers to his mother's brother as magwapa,and is
referred to in turn as ruwey.He uses the same term magwapato refer to descending
generation male members of MB's patriline (MBS, MBSS, MBSSS), and also
uses the term to refer to all other equivalent-generation male members of MB's
clan as a whole. All of a man's terminologically-defined magwapareciprocally
refer to ego as ruwey. Magwapatherefore denotes MB, MBS, MBSS, MBSSS
etc., and ruwey denotes ZS, FZS, FFZS etc. The use of this single term,
magwapa,to refer cross-generationally to MB and MB's patrilineal descendants
can be correlated simply and neatly with the structure of the exchange rela-
tionship between a man and the male members of his MB's patriline. MB and
MB's male patrilineal descendants all occupy, actually or potentially, structur-
ally equivalent roles vis-a-visego in this relationship, since they all either hold or
stand to inherit identical (primary) exchange rights in ego. Thus, if ego outlives
his MB, the MBS takes over (inherits) the MB's role in the exchange rela-
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
758 ROSS BOWDEN
tionship; the MBS is now obliged to 'look after' ego in exactly the same way as
his father (the MB) did before him, and on ego's death becomes the major
recipient of the death payment. Similarly, if ego outlives both his MB and MBS,
the MBSS in turn takes over the MB's (and MBS's) role in the same exchange
relationship; the MBSS is now obliged to 'look after' ego in the same way as his
father (the MBS), and father's father (the MB) did before him, and becomes the
principal recipient of the death payment.
Kwoma explicitly account for the cross-generational merging of MB and
MB's patrilineal descendants in this way. They point out that while the MB is
alive ego refers to his MBS as magwapaakiir, which literally means 'another
MB'. While the MB is alive, the MBS reciprocally refers to ego as sowhapa
ruwey. (I can offer no translation of the term sowhapa.)The point of referring to
the MBS as magwapaakiir, people say, is that on the MB's death, the MBS will
take over the MB's role in the magwapa/ruweyexchange relationship for the
duration of ego's life. When the MB dies, the MBS is no longer referred to as
magwapaakiir, but is simply magwapa(recip. ruwey);but the MBSS in turn is
now referred to as magwapaakiir (recip. sowhaparuwey), indicating that if ego
outlives his MBS as well, the MBSS will take over the MBS's role in the
exchange relationship. On the MBS's death the MBSS is now referredto simply
as magwapa(recip. ruwey), and the MBSSS in turn is referred to as magwapaakiir
(recip. sowhaparuwey), and so on.
For Kwoma, therefore, the cross-generational merging of MB and MB's
male patrilineal descendants expresses the social fact that the latter occupy
structurally equivalent roles to MB in the magwapa/ruwey exchange rela-
tionship, since, irrespective of genealogical level, they all stand to succeed
patrilineally to the social position in the exchange relationship initially occupied
by MB (cf. Lounsbury I964: 3 82-3; Murdock i965: I68-9).
The use of the same term, magwapa,for all other male members of MB's clan
of MB's generation and below can similarly be correlated with the structure of
this exchange relationship, for all persons so denoted likewise either hold, or
stand to inherit, (secondary) exchange rights e.g.-as, in ego, in a share of
ego's puberty and death payments. The term magwapaused cross-generationally
for all male members of MB's clan of MB's generation and below, therefore,
denotes (and denotes exclusively) males who either hold, or stand to inherit,
formal exchange rights in male ego. These rights are held or inherited primarily
by male members of MB's patriline of MB's generation and below, and second-
arily by other equivalent-generation members of MB's clan as a whole. The
term magwapaakiir, used exclusively for male members of MB's patriline of
MBS's generation and below, denotes persons who stand to inherit primary
exchange rights in ego on the death of the current right-holder. 12
Significantly, male ego distinguishes MB from MF, and refers to the latter by
a term, atokw, which, with its reciprocal, nyia, does not define an exchange
relationship in any context. In no context, that is, is ego obliged to give wealth
or food to a person he refers to as atokw, and in no context is he formally
obliged to receive wealth or food from a person he refers to as nyija. This
terminological distinction between MB and MF is again consistent with the
structure of the exchange relationship between a man and members of his MB's
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ROSS BOWDEN 759
patriline. Mother's father, as we have seen, neither holds nor inherits exchange
rights of any kind in ego: he does not receive a share of ego's puberty payment;
does not receive a share of his death payment, and is explicitly said not to be
formally entitled to do so. Mother's father, therefore, does not occupy, actually
or potentially, a structurally equivalent role, vis-d-vis ego, to MB or MB's
patrilineal descendants in the exchange relationship. In keeping with this, MF is
terminologically distinguished from MB, and is referredto by a term that has no
implications as far as exchange rights are concerned. Moreover, unlike magwapa
(that is, 'true magwapa'),which refers exclusively to (male) members of MB's
clan, atokw refers generally to all second ascending generation relatives con-
nected through mother (for example, MF, MM, MFZ, MFZH).
The structure of the exchange relationship between a wife-giving and wife-
taking patriline in the third and fourth generations of an alliance can similarly be
correlated with cross-generational mergings in the terminology. For instance,
male ego refers to all male members of FMB's patriline of FMB's generation and
below by a single term: yey (recip. nyija). Thus yey denotes (among other
persons) FMB, FMBS, FMBSS, FMBSSS. The use of a single term for FMB
and FMB's male descendants is consistent with the social fact that all of these
persons occupy structurally equivalent roles vis-d-vis ego in the informal
exchange relationship that obtains between a man and members of his FMB's
patriline of father's mother's brother's generation and below: all these persons
either hold or stand to inherit identical informal exchange rights in ego.
Significantly, ego terminologically distinguishes FMB (yey) from FMF (walaga;
recip. nyijasob). This distinction can be correlated with the social fact that FMF
does not occupy a structurally equivalent role (actually or potentially) to FMB
in this exchange relationship, since FMF neither holds nor stands to inherit any
exchange rights in ego.
Similar observations can be made about terms used for FFMB's patriline.
M;ale ego cross-generationally merges FFMB and FFMB's male patrilineal
descendants irrespective of genealogical level. This merging can be correlated
with the social fact that an identical informal exchange relationship obtains
actually or potentially between a man and male members of his FFMB's patri-
line ofFFMB's generation and below; for the lattereither hold, or stand to inherit,
identical informal exchange rights in ego. Again, it is significant that male
ego distinguishes FFMB from FFMF (for whom ego in fact has no relationship
term); this is consistent with the social fact that FFMF does not occupy a
structurally equivalent role, vis-a-visego, to FFMB in this exchange relationship,
since FFMF neither holds nor stands to inherit any exchange rights in ego. 13
The object of this article has been to demonstrate the way in which an explicit
'alliance' model of terminology and marriage may be used to explicate the
distinctive and 'problematic' cross-generational equations in the Kwoma rela-
tionship terminology. This alliance model differs, however, from models
advanced by such theorists as Levi-Strauss, Dumont and Needham in that it
applies to a society that lacks positive marriage rules: Kwoma do not regularly
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
760 ROSS BOWDEN
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ROSS BOWDEN 76I
TABLE 2. KwomaPidginEnglishrelationshipterms*.
Pidgin Kwomaequivalents
i. 'mama' (mother) nowkwapa('M')
'wasmama' nowkwapa (F'sco-wife)
'bikpelamama' nawalaka ('MeZ')
'smalmama' amoy('MyZ')
2. 'papa'(father) apok('F')
'bikpelapapa' apalaka('FeB')
'smalpapa' amoy('FyB')
'waspapa' apalakaandamoy(appliedto F'sactual
brothersonly)
3. 'pikinini'(piccaninni) yikapa('C')
4. 'brada'(brother) lakakumoy(m.s. 'B', f.s. 'Z')
'bikpelabrada' laka
'smalbrada' kumoy
5. 'susa'(sister) mowoy(usedfor femalesonly, e.g. m.s. Z)
yakw(usedfor femalesonly, e.g. FZ)
miidiila(f.s. 'B')
6. 'tambu' nibel('WB')
mowoy(usedfor malesonly, e.g. m.s. ZH)
yakw(usedfor malesonly, e.g. FZH,HZH)
nel('WBS')
merntambu' yekim(WBW)
7. 'kanderi'(kindred) magwapa ('MB')
ruwey(e.g. m.s. ZC, HZC)
'mernkanderi' wapok('MBW')
8. 'tumbuna' yey, walaga,atokw,nyija,nyijokw,
nyijasob
9. 'man'(man) ma('H')
io. 'meri' (Mary)t mima('W')
ii. 'pren','poroman'(friend) (friend;[f.s.] co-wife)
nariiboy
* All Pidgintermsareusedforbothaddressandreference.
t In Pidgin 'meri' is the conventional term for woman (as well as wife).
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
762 ROSS BOWDEN
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ROSS BOWDEN 763
NOTES
1 Although Iatmul terminology has figured prominently in several recent discussions of Omaha
classifications (e.g. Ackerman I976; Williamson I980) I exclude reference to it since it differs
markedly in structure from that of the Kwoma-merging alternateratherthan adjacentgenealogical
levels (MB = MBSS, MBS = MBSSS etc.). Iatmul terminology and marriage in any case present
special problems which will be considered elsewhere in a comparative analysis of Sepik social
structure.
2 The orthography adopted for Kwoma words follows that proposed by Kooyers et al. (I97I).
'B', 'd', 'g' and 'j' are all prenasalised and are equivalent to 'mb', 'nd', 'ngg' and 'nj' respectively.
Thus magwil, the Kwoma term for clan, is pronounced 'manggwil' (alt. 'menggwil'). The spelling
of village and tribal names follows that of the Village Directory for I968.
3 There is no ideology that the clans composing a totemic division are related by descent from a
common forebear, totemic or otherwise. Whiting's (I94I: 6) assertion to the contrary is incorrect.
For a more detailed discussion of Kwoma social organisation see Bowden I983: 8-43.
4 Williamson's assertion (I980: 538) that Kwoma have a preferential rule of marriage with a
classificatory FZD (ruwey) is incorrect; so is her claim (and hence the elaborate argument she
constructs on the basis of it) that men reclassify their wives after marriage so that they are said to be
ruwey, whatever their actual relationship prior to marriage (I980: 544). Of the I00 marriages for
which I have detailed genealogical information, 47 involved marriages to terminologically unrelated
women, I8 to classificatory 'sisters' (mainly women from the same totemic divisions as their
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
764 ROSS BOWDEN
husbands), and the remaining 35 to women from eleven different categories, only four of whom
were classified as ruwey('FZD').
5 Heritier (I98i) advances a model of 'semi-complex' kinship systems, based on field data
collected among the Samo of Upper Volta, intended to apply to all 'Omaha' societies (cf. I980:
I28-3 i). Although the Samo terminology and marriage rules correspond, in certain respects, to
those of the Kwoma, her model is not directly applicable to this society (see also Barnes I982).
Heritier's argument, as well as L6vi-Strauss's in 'The future of kinship studies' to which it is closely
related, will be examined in detail elsewhere.
6 The bulk of the shell valuables the husband himself contributes to his bridewealth payment will
have been given to him by his father when he reached puberty. But he will also have obtained some
by way of trade for sago from people along the Sepik (the traditional source of Kwoma shell
valuables), and some as his share of bridewealth and other payments made for married clan 'sisters'.
Unlike many other Sepik peoples (e.g. Lewis I975: 34) Kwoma still use shell valuables to make
affinal payments, and eschew the use of money.
7 If the wife's brother is immature at the time of his sister's marriage his father may accept his
share of the bridewealth payment on his behalf, and hold it for him until he reaches puberty.
8 If a marriage ends in divorce the exchange relationship between the husband and wife's brother
is brought to an end, but is re-established between the woman's brother and her new husband as
soon as she remarries. Kwoma women of marriageable age never remain unmarried for long
following a divorce. In fact, women only leave their husbands after they have secretly arranged to
marry someone else.
9 If a sister's daughter dies before she marries, her death payment (made by her natal clan) goes to
her mother's brother. The death payment for a married woman, therefore, goes to her brother'sclan,
but for an unmarried girl it goes to her mother'sbrother'sclan.
10 Lewis (I980: 86 sq.) describes a similar arrangement for the West Sepik Gnau.
11 Nel denotes natal female, as well as male members of WB's patriline of WBS's generation and
below. Since these women do not stand to inherit exchange rights in ego's wife, the term nel, unlike
nibel, does not exclusively denote persons who are actually or potentially implicated in an exchange
relationship with ego. Men recognise this, and contextually distinguish between male nel, with
whom they are potentially implicated in an exchange relationship, and female nel, with whom they
are not, by saying of the latter 'They are women', or 'They are female nel'.
12 A female speaker uses the same terms for members of MB's clan as a male speaker uses. For a
never-married girl these terms have the same jural connotations as far as exchange rights are
concerned as they do for a man (marriedor unmarried). However, since a MB loses exchange rights
in his ZD when she marries, for a married woman they have no such connotations.
13 In contrast to the terms nibel ('WB') and magwapa('MB'), yey and walaga do not exclusively
denote persons with whom ego is implicated (actually or potentially) in an exchange relationship,
for they also denote (among other persons) second and third ascending generation male members
respectively of own line (e.g. FF and FFF).
REFERENCES
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ROSS BOWDEN 765
This content downloaded from 130.240.43.43 on Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:14:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions