Just to add a comment regarding the correct translation of Groneman's original:
Quote:
|
... ukiran in Form menschlicher und tierischer Gestalten, in Form von djagung (Mais-)Kolben oder Blumen, die gana genannt werden, wie auch einige dem menschlichen Bilde gleichende Baumwurzen.
|
In German, two different meanings seem to be possible and I have a really tough time to decide which may be the intended one.
Interpretation 1:
ukiran of human and animal form,
(ukiran) of jagung form (corn cobs or flowers called gana), and
also some tree roots resembling a human figure.
This may be the intended meaning but it would be only unequivocal if Groneman had completed the enumeration:
(ukiran) of human form (made from tree roots naturally resembling a human figure).
I feel Groneman avoided this more tedious writing for stylistic reasons but grammatically this is not correct (neither with nor without repeating the word ukiran).
Interpretation 2:
ukiran of the form of human and animal,
and
ukiran of the form of jagung (corn) cobs or flowers which are called gana (as is also true for some tree-roots resembling a human figure).
For this interpretation there is the crucial "
and" missing: In German, one would have expected a "sowie" for stylistic reasons. A word can go missing in print but in this case it doesn't appear to be a printer's error since there's no punctuation mark (i. e. comma) in front of an "und" or "sowie" in German. Still, it could be an enumeration of just 2 alternatives separated only with an ideosyncratic comma...
What are the Dutch grammar rules for enumerations since this was Groneman's language?
BTW, is the tree of life interpretation for the corn cob hilt type undisputed?
Regards,
Kai