82
They do not only hold the potential of delivering messages for those who know how
to read them, but they are also carriers of intention and might. Thereby, many events,
objects, plants, or animals are referred to as señas (netanec).
20
This word accounts
for both the involuntary ‘hints’ or ‘traces’ of behaviour and intentions that diverse
beings leave behind,
21
and the voluntary ‘messages’ with which they seek to intentionally communicate their intentions to others, including humans. The signs are
thus potent events (letanaxanaxac or lehuanaxanac) to be interpreted and on which
discernment (retanta or ne’pelanxanta’a) must be applied.
22
They do not enable to
just ‘predict’, ‘guess’, or ‘speculate’ future behaviours or events, but also to understand what has already happened and imbue it with meaning. The socio-cosmos
described by our Moqoit interlocutors is in constant demand of hermeneutic action.
23
This notion lacks a sense of separation between nature and culture, fundamental for
European conceptions of the environment.
The señas, as concurrent and complex systems of multiple and contradictory
meanings, enable the negotiation of a whole diversity of interpretations, as Gilles
Rivière (1997: 42–43) suggests for the Aymara. They are thus transformed in a
method to manage what in other way would escape human control, allowing to give
answers to incorrect human previsions, which are framed in a truth that is always
relational and evaluated in action (Rivière, 1997: 37). We agree with this author’s
affirmation that any ‘mistake’, far from being thought of in absolute terms, can be
corrected by negotiation and exchange (Rivière, 1997: 44). Signs and their meanings are always subject to processes of negotiation and confrontation between the
involved interlocutors, which is why there is a true political economy of signs
strongly linked to disputes for leadership and legitimation. Those negotiations and
disputes articulate in shamanic logics, which make strong emphasis on the authority
of the spoken word, endorsed by public displays of power. In these logics, evidentiality
24
functions as the main a criterion of truth.
A wide selection of examples of the use of this category among the Moqoit will
be presented ahead. We will also draw upon examples from other Guaycurú groups,
20 In Moqoit, netanec means ‘its sign’ or ‘signal of something’, ‘its mark’; Netanqa, ‘its various
signs’; netanqaipi, ‘its many signs’. In our fieldwork, we have documented their use, for example,
to designate the signs of the presence of a powerful being, or the birds that warned the ancient
leaders of the proximity of enemies. These meanings are conveyed in the Buckwalter dictionary
(Buckwalter, 1995) and also in the translation that the Moqoit Roberto Ruíz and the Buckwalter
couple of the Mennonite team made of various passages of the New Testament (Mt. 16, 1–4; Lc.
21, 7–25) referring to messianic and climate signals (Ruíz, Buckwalter, & Buckwalter, 1988).
21 As happens with the broken branches and tracks of an animal that moves through the bush, that
help the hunter identify it species, heading and intentions. In fact, the Moqoit understand that the
animals themselves and other world inhabitants carry out similar acts of interpretation.
22 See Buckwalter’s dictionary (1995; Buckwalter & de Buckwalter, 2004).
23 Following Ricoeur (1983 [1965]).
24 It is important to bear in mind that the Guaycurú languages place evidentiality (that is, the distinction between what they witness directly and what is only known by indirect references) at the
center of their way of thinking about time and space (López, 2009a: 182–188; Gualdieri, 1998:
289; Messineo, 2003: 166–171).
A. M. López
They do not only hold the potential of delivering messages for those who know how
to read them, but they are also carriers of intention and might. Thereby, many events,
objects, plants, or animals are referred to as señas (netanec).
20
This word accounts
for both the involuntary ‘hints’ or ‘traces’ of behaviour and intentions that diverse
beings leave behind,
21
and the voluntary ‘messages’ with which they seek to intentionally communicate their intentions to others, including humans. The signs are
thus potent events (letanaxanaxac or lehuanaxanac) to be interpreted and on which
discernment (retanta or ne’pelanxanta’a) must be applied.
22
They do not enable to
just ‘predict’, ‘guess’, or ‘speculate’ future behaviours or events, but also to understand what has already happened and imbue it with meaning. The socio-cosmos
described by our Moqoit interlocutors is in constant demand of hermeneutic action.
23
This notion lacks a sense of separation between nature and culture, fundamental for
European conceptions of the environment.
The señas, as concurrent and complex systems of multiple and contradictory
meanings, enable the negotiation of a whole diversity of interpretations, as Gilles
Rivière (1997: 42–43) suggests for the Aymara. They are thus transformed in a
method to manage what in other way would escape human control, allowing to give
answers to incorrect human previsions, which are framed in a truth that is always
relational and evaluated in action (Rivière, 1997: 37). We agree with this author’s
affirmation that any ‘mistake’, far from being thought of in absolute terms, can be
corrected by negotiation and exchange (Rivière, 1997: 44). Signs and their meanings are always subject to processes of negotiation and confrontation between the
involved interlocutors, which is why there is a true political economy of signs
strongly linked to disputes for leadership and legitimation. Those negotiations and
disputes articulate in shamanic logics, which make strong emphasis on the authority
of the spoken word, endorsed by public displays of power. In these logics, evidentiality
24
functions as the main a criterion of truth.
A wide selection of examples of the use of this category among the Moqoit will
be presented ahead. We will also draw upon examples from other Guaycurú groups,
20 In Moqoit, netanec means ‘its sign’ or ‘signal of something’, ‘its mark’; Netanqa, ‘its various
signs’; netanqaipi, ‘its many signs’. In our fieldwork, we have documented their use, for example,
to designate the signs of the presence of a powerful being, or the birds that warned the ancient
leaders of the proximity of enemies. These meanings are conveyed in the Buckwalter dictionary
(Buckwalter, 1995) and also in the translation that the Moqoit Roberto Ruíz and the Buckwalter
couple of the Mennonite team made of various passages of the New Testament (Mt. 16, 1–4; Lc.
21, 7–25) referring to messianic and climate signals (Ruíz, Buckwalter, & Buckwalter, 1988).
21 As happens with the broken branches and tracks of an animal that moves through the bush, that
help the hunter identify it species, heading and intentions. In fact, the Moqoit understand that the
animals themselves and other world inhabitants carry out similar acts of interpretation.
22 See Buckwalter’s dictionary (1995; Buckwalter & de Buckwalter, 2004).
23 Following Ricoeur (1983 [1965]).
24 It is important to bear in mind that the Guaycurú languages place evidentiality (that is, the distinction between what they witness directly and what is only known by indirect references) at the
center of their way of thinking about time and space (López, 2009a: 182–188; Gualdieri, 1998:
289; Messineo, 2003: 166–171).
A. M. López