UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An analysis of Beaver Indian and Alaskan Eskimo myths 1976

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1977_A8 M37.pdf [ 21.82MB ]
UBC_1977_A8 M37.pdf
Metadata
JSON: 1.0094151.json
JSON-LD: 1.0094151+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0094151.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0094151+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0094151+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0094151+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0094151.ris

Full Text

AN ANALYSIS OF BEAVER INDIAN AND ALASKAN ESKIMO MYTHS A COMPARATIVE APPROACH by VERONICA MARACH A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of Anthropology and Sociology We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA JUNE 1976 (c) Veronica Marach In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumb ia , I a g ree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s tudy . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . It i s u n d e r s t o o d that c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i thout my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . n c Anthropology and Sociology Department of O J The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date fU^J^ **  /cm i i ABSTRACT The methods of analysis of Pierre and E l l i Kongas Maranda, Robert P. Armstrong and Vladimir Propp were tested by applying them to two sets of corpora. The corpora consist of ten Beaver Indian myths and ten Alaskan Eskimo myths.'""' The abstracts generated by each method of analysis were then compared and contrasted with each other. The introduction delimited the f i e l d of oral tradition, especially that of myth and presented a historical discussion of the methods of folk l o r i c analysis commencing with functionalism. The three methods of analysis were compared with Piaget's theory of structuralism. Each method was also discussed in terms of Levi-Strauss' definition of logic. Each analyst's method of determining the component parts of a myth were examined. Finally the introduction included an outline of conclusions reached in this study, and posed several questions, the answers' to which becam® apparent in the succeeding chapters. The three chapters following the introduction were Propp's, Armstrong's and the Marandas' analysis. Each chapter described the analyst's approach and included the analysis of the Beaver Indian and the Alaskan Esmimo myths and their findings. Included also was a comparison and contrast of previous results and a discussion in terms of the analysts' general rules of procedure. Finally the results were examined in terms of Piaget's con- cept of structuralism, and in conjunction with this,, their logic discussed in terms of Levi-Strauss's concept as outlined in the introduction. The conclusion drew together the findings of the preceeding chapters. It compared and contrasted the results of each method of analysis, discusses the inherent logic and kind of structuralism applied as defined by Piaget. This f i n a l section also examined each culture through the d i f - ferent analytical approaches. i i i . ... The-Marandas' method of analysis revealed more about the Beaver and Alaskan cultures than did Propp's and Armstrong's method of analysis.; ". . With regards to the Beaver culture, Propp's method of analysis focused attention on lack of food, cannibalism and kidnapping. Beaver cultures also put great emphasis on winning through the use of cunning and trickery as opposed to the use of force. Punishment rather than reward was often employed to conclude.a myth. With regards to the Alaskan culture, Propp's method of analysis brought attention to the concern over a lack of people,. Villainous actions revolved around kidnapping. Force was not used unless necessary and in defense. Great emphasis was placed on reward rather than punishment at the conclusion of a myth. With regards to the Beaver culture, Armstrong's method of analysis emphasized k i l l i n g in terms of resistance and attack.. Information getting ' was also.considered important, as was the acceptance or avoidance of one's obligations. With regards to the Alaskan culture, Armstrong's method of analysis also .emphasized, information getting. The acceptance of one's obligations also seemed important.. Few concrete statements were made about either culture based on Armstrong's method of analysis. The Marandas' method of analysis helped reveal a great deal.about both cultures. For example, in the Beaver culture the concept of time was noted; kin relationships were emphasized; the conflict over loyalty to blood relatives as opposed to non blood relatives was brought out; rules regarding marriages were implied; the fact that the Bear has special respect and a place in their lives was brought out; rules on incest were implied; we were 3 i v given some i n s i g h t on how food i s preserved and prepared; r u l e s with regards to. cannabalism were also implied} the subject of dreaming, of powerful medicine and the importance of the s p i r i t helper was brought out; the land . was part of the people and they would go to war over the threat of l o s i n g t h e i r land.. F i n a l l y , the d i f f e r e n t spheres of the universe were emphasized i n the corpus, "such as the sky world, land and the underworld. The place- ment-of natures elements, i e . sun, moon, etc, are c e n t r a l to the culture as t h e i r memory and d a i l y routines are based on them. Deep messages were r e a l i z e d i n the Beaver c u l t u r e . Such questions as man's origin,'born from one or two, the f i n a l i t y of death and r e b i r t h versus r e s u r r e c t i o n were posed. In the Alaskan culture the concept of time was also noted; emphasis was given to the heavenly bodies, such as the sun, moon and nature's elements,,, such?'as the wind and r a i n . These played an i n t r i c a t e r o l e i n t h e i r everyday l i f e , so much so that often inanimate objects were personified,.. . The d i f f e r e n t spheres such as sky world, land and underworld were also emphasized in.the c o r p u s t h e importance of the family was made apparent; who makes marriage decisions and r u l e s with regards to marriage and divorce were implied; authority was. also a subject that was important i n the culture^ as was the concept of. a non - h i e r a r c h i a l leadership; the importance of magic powers or of s p i r i t powers were also brought out i n the corpus. Deep messages were brought out i n the Alaskan myths as w e l l , and concerned questions such as man's o r i g i n and the f i n a l i t y of death. There seemed to be more contradictions i n the Alaskan myths ;than i n the Beaver myths. For example, statements regarding authority versus a non-hierarchial leadership. This may be due to the f a c t that the Alaskan myths were taken from a la r g e r geographical area than were the Beaver myths. 4 V Furthermore, the myth, Adventures of Raven, did not seem to f i t , in with the other Alaskan myths, and was perhaps borrowed. Thus, the Mararidas' method of analysis was shown to be the more structured in i t s theory and more productive in i t s practice.,. This method of analysis helped give many insights into the Beaver and Alaskan culture and has revealed some profound underlying messages. VI CONTENTS ABSTRACT I INTRODUCTION 1 I I APPLICATION OF PROPP'S METHOD OF ANALYSIS 1. Introduction 23 2.i) Analysis of Beaver Myths 29 i i ) Results of Beaver Analysis 53 3-i) Analysis of Alaskan Myths 66 i i ) Results of Alaskan Analysis 88 4 . i j Comparison and Contrast of Results 98 i i ) General Discussion of Analysis 111 III APPLICATION OF ARMSTRONG'S METHOD OF ANALYSIS 1. Introduction 2.i) Analysis.of Beaver Myths i i ) Results.of Beaver Analysis 3..i) Analysis.of Alaskan Myths i i ) Results of Alaskan Analysis 4.i) Comparison and Contrast, of Results ii') General Discussion of Analysis IV APPLICATION OF MARANDAS' METHOD OF ANALYSIS 1. Introduction 214 2.i) Analysis of Beaver Myths 222 i i ) Results of Beaver Analysis 262 3.i) Analysis of Alaskan Myths 282 i i ) Results of Alaskan Analysis 313 4»i) Comparison and Contrast of Results 331 i i ) General Discussion of Analysis 348 V CONCLUSION 367 BIBLIOGRAPHY 3 8 8 APPENDICES I & I I 390 129 132 158 166 187 193 199 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The purpose of this thesis i s two-fold. F i r s t , the operational approaches to myths of Pierre and E l l i Kongas Maranda, Robert P. Armstrong, and Vladimir Propp shall be tested by applying them to two sets of corpora,.. Second, the abstracts generated by each method of analysis shall be compared and contrasted with each other. One corpus consists of ten Alaskan Eskimo myths compiled by Ruth McCorkle and published by Robert D. Seal in 1958. The other corpus used con- sists of ten Beaver Indian myths selected at random from those collected by Robin Ridington i n 1966. Before describing each operational approach and i t s application to the corpora, we shall define the f i e l d of oral tradition,, particularly that of myths, and then b r i e f l y introduce some of the important perpetrators of folklo r i c exploration. Although Propp, Armstrong and the Marandas are i n - cluded among these, their interpretations of folklore w i l l be discussed in chapters 2, 3 and 4 respectively. Next, the development of the different analytical approaches shall be outlined giving the reader a general picture of where each method of analysis discussed here f i t s into the overall"history of the development of folkloric analysis. The study of folklore as a branch of cultural anthropology i s f a i r l y recent, and many people often use the terms folklore, folktales,,, myths and legends indiscriminately. Folklore includes f a i r y tales,, myths, legends, folktales., riddles, songs, jokes, or any other oral narrative that i s pur- poseful and passed on from generation to generation. Carvalho-Neto d i f - ferentiates between folklore, ethnology, and ethnography by defining the characteristics of a f o l k l o r i s t i c act: i t i s cultural, belongs to any people,. i s anonymous, non-institutionalized, old, functional and prelogical. The ethnographic act, he says, has a l l these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s but anonymity and n o n - i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n . In t h i s way he i s able to i l l u s t r a t e that f o l k l o r e does not study culture as a whole, but instead as a s p e c i f i c type of c u l t u r a l act. (Carvalho-Neto, 1971:91)• Boas questions whether f o l k l o r e mirrors societ y or compensates f o r lacks i n that s o c i e t y . Bascom thinks that f o l k l o r e i s important i n composing the culture of a people. I t sanctions and v a l i d a t e s religious,, s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l , economic and educational institutions.* At the same time f o l k l o r e provides s o c i a l l y approved o u t l e t s against.the r e s t r i c t i o n s which the sustaining i n s t i t u t i o n s impose upon the i n d i v i d u a l within that c u l t u r e , (Dundes, 1965:277). Dundes, i n an opinion s i m i l a r to Bascom' s,,; says the function of f o l k l o r e i s to educate the young, promote a f e e l i n g of group s o l i d a r i t y , provide s o c i a l l y approved ways of e s t a b l i s h i n g a c l a s s hierarchy,, act as a v e h i c l e . o f s o c i a l protest, escape from r e a l i t y and convert d u l l work i n t o play. (Dundes, 1965:277). Since we are t e s t i n g three operational approaches to myths,, l e t us consider Malinowski's and other anthropologists views i n regards to myths,.. Malinowski draws a simple but c l e a r d i s t i n c t i o n between myths., legends, and t a l e s , A t a l e i s . a seasonal performance and an act of s o c i a b i l i t y . , a legend i s . a s e m i - h i s t o r i c a l account of the past, A myth, he declares, i s the most important category of f o l k l o r e . The myth i s employed when an important r i t e ceremony, s o c i a l or moral r u l e demands j u s t i f i c a t i o n * Furthermore, he sees i t as a statement of primeval r e a l i t y which e x i s t s i n contemporary l i f e , and a charter f o r s o c i a l a c t i o n . The function i f f u l f i l l s i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to a t r a d i t i o n which strengthens and endows i t with a greater value and p r e s t i g 3 by t r a c i n g i t back to a more elevated and more supernatural, existence,. Moreover, he sees the function of a myth as c o d i f y i n g b e l i e f , safeguarding and enforcing morality, and vouching f o r the e f f i c i e n c y of r i t u a l * Myths contain p r a c t i c a l r u l es f o r the guidance of man,. They also record incon- s i s t e n c i e s i n h i s h i s t o r y , Malinowski claims the importance of myth i s . . i t s character of a retrospective and ever present l i v e a c t u a l i t y i n a culture.. I t i s not a f i c t i t i o u s story nor a h i s t o r i c a l account of the past,. Myth functions where there i s a s o c i o l o g i c a l s t r a i n , a d i f f e r e n c e , i n rank and power. Furthermore, myth presents the idea of f a t e , of the i n e v i t a b l e , and depicts the yearning f o r immortality and a resignation to the transcieney of l i f e (Malinowski, 1954:143-148). E l i a d e , too, conceives myth as a complex c u l t u r a l r e a l i t y that explains how such a r e a l i t y came i n t o being. He alleges that myths describe the many and sometimes dramatic appearances of the sacred or supernatural phenomena of the world. He sees the actors i n myths as supernatural beings., i and says that myths r e l a t e not only to the o r i g i n s of the world,, plants,, animals and man, but also to the.primeval events i n consequence of which . man became.what he i s today mortal, sexed, and organized i n a society,. E l i a d e . a l s o states that myth i s always related, to creation and therefore i f the mythology of a culture i s understood, so i s the creation of that culture., He sees, the function of myth as revealing models and g i v i n g meaning to the world and human l i f e . I t i s through myth that the world can be comprehended as an a r t i c u l a t e , i n t e l l i g i b l e and s i g n i f i c a n t cosmos. Myths rev e a l by whom, why,.and under which circumstances a people were created,, They furthermore compose sacred h i s t o r y , and serve as a reminder that glorious events s t i l l p a r t l y recoverable, once took place on earth. ( E l i a d e , 1968:5-6). 4 Burridge interprets myths as reservoirs or articulate thought on the level of the collective, and both he and Eliade see the purpose of myth as providing a logical model capable of overcoming a real contradiction.. Mary Douglas explains.this same idea in a different way*: She sees the function of myth as.portraying the contradictions of the unsatisfactory compromises which compose social l i f e . The nature of mythy she states.,, i s to mediate these contradictions. Levi-Strauss claims that "myth i s the same as language,, but at the same time different from i t , functioning on a high level of abstraction, where meaning succeeds practically at'taking off from.the linguistic ground on which i t keeps r o l l i n g . " (Levi-Strauss, 19b7:206)>. Furthermore,,.he says that myth always refers to historical events but that their operational value l i e s i n the specific.patterns described, which are timeless - — it.explains past, present, arid future. This concept i s best•explained by Levi-Strauss' use of langue and parole. In any culture a langue i s a given; a to t a l system or word convention and usages, a frame of reference. Parole, as grammatical conventions, with tones and accents, i s selected from the tot a l system of langue, and by placing these i n a particular order.y information i s transmitted. The idea that something equivalent to langue and parole i s alike in one sense yet opposite and interdependent i n the other,;, also i s found i n many other anthropologists' writings. Myth, Levi-Strauss says,, i s an intermediary between langue and parole. More specifically,, he finds a meaning i n the way.in which the elements of the myth are combined;. These elements or gross constituent units, or mythemes,, obtained by breaking down a myth, into i t s shortest possible sentences, are found at the sentence level'. 5 Each mytheme contains a r e l a t i o n , and true constituent u n i t s are bundles of these r e l a t i o n s as opposed to considering each r e l a t i o n between the gross constituents u n i t s separately. Levi-Strauss proceeds to explain that " r e l a t i o n s p e r t a i n i n g to the same bundle may appear d i a c h r o n i c a l l y at remote i n t e r v a l s , but when they have been grouped together the myth has been reorganized according to a d i f f e r e n t time referent of a new nature:,, c o r r e s - ponding to the pr e r e q u i s i t e of the i n i t i a l hypothesis — — namely a two dimensional time referent which i s simultaneously diachronic and synchronic,, and which accordingly integrates the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of langue on-the one. hand and those of parole on the other" (Levi-Strauss, 1967:208);. Leach, as well as Levi-Strauss, understands that there are c e r t a i n binary concepts or p r i n c i p l e s that are considered to be a part of man's nature, and.which are found i n many anthropologist's w r i t i n g s . According to Leach, system•(parts of speech) opposes syntagm (sentences),, metaphor (recognition of . s i m i l a r i t i e s ) opposes metonomy (recognition of contiguities),, paradigmatic s e r i e s oppose syntagmatic chains. In reference to t h i s , then, Leach does not see the idea of binary p r i n c i p l e s as new,. Furthermore, he points out that.Frazer's theory of homeopathic magic, based on the law of s i m i l a r i t y , opposes h i s theory of contagious magic, based on,the law on contact, and i s rather s i m i l a r to Levi-Strauss' d i s t i n c t i o n between langue and.parole. Leach brings together a l l the d i f f e r e n t forms of terminology that have been used to explain the p r i n c i p l e of binary opposition found i n s t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s . He indicates that Barthes opposes system and syntagm,, system r e f e r r i n g to a complete language, and also to denote the parts of speech of that language, such as nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc., and the term 6 syntagm r e f e r r i n g to an assemblage of non verbal signs, corresponds to a sentence i n a v e r b a l language. Leach points out that "where Barthes opposes system and syntagm, the corresponding contracts i n Levi-Strauss are metaphor and metonym or sometimes paradigmatic s e r i e s and syntagmatic chain r e s p e c t i v e l y , whereas the former derive from language.,- and the l a t t e r from speech. (Leach, 1970:48). Furthermore, Leach f i n d s that Jakobson believed that metaphor r e l i e d upon the recognition of s i m i l a r i t y while metonymy r e l i e d upon the recognition of c o n t i g u i t y . Leach then,- points out that "Fraser*s homeopathic contagious d i s t i n c t i o n i s p r a c t i c a l l y i d e n t i c a l to the Jakobson-Levi-Strauss metaphoric-metonymic d i s t i n c t i o n " (Leach, 1970:49) We can also add Levi-Strauss' two dimensional time referent which integrates system and syntagm, or parole and langue. Levi-Strauss c a l l s these synchronic and diachronic, r e s p e c t i v e l y . Diachronic organization of a myth arranges i t s components i n h i s t o r i c a l s e q u e n c e s w h i l e the synchronic organization enables one to arrange the components without t h i s p a r t i c u l a r time r e f e r e n t . He i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s concept by employing the analogy of a musical score, which i s read both d i a c h r o n i c a l l y along the h o r i z o n t a l axis and then synchronically along the v e r t i c a l a x i s . The score becomes synchronic when both the .horizontal and the v e r t i c a l axis are read simultaneously to transform a one dimensional i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of myth to a two dimensional, i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Or more simply a synchronic perspective of something may be Obtained by reading two graphic coordinates simultaneously^. As we can see here then, a diachronic perspective should serve as a point of departure i n any investigation„ Putting the above together, we have two groups of dimensions - the metaphoric-paradigmatic-similarity-synchronic and the metonymic-syntagmatic-contiguous-diachronic. 7 . One of our concerns as analysts i s with the nature of the l o g i c inherent i n the method of a n a l y s i s . Levi-Strauss searches ..for the p r i n c i p l e s of thought formation which are u n i v e r s a l l y v a l i d f o r a l l human minds, and sees myths as a c o l l e c t i v e dream, capable of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n so as to reveal i t s hidden meaning. He claims that "man has always been thinking equally well; the improvement l i e s not i n the progress of man's mind, but i n the discovery of new areas to which man may apply himself1'.-*. (Levi-Strauss, 1967:227).. Boas also said that there i s no p r i m i t i v e mentality, but basic mental pro- cesses i n the world. Burridge sees Levi-Strauss as attempting t o . i l l u s t r a t e the u n i v e r s a l i t y of the process of a r t i c u l a t e thought, and understands him. as saying that "symbols, things and p a r t i c u l a r r e l a t i o n s may d i f f e r from culture t o culture but the address of the human mind towards them i s the same" (Burridge, 1967:100). According to Levi-Strauss i t i s t h i s sameness found at that l e v e l of abstraction which resolves d i f f e r e n t r e l a t i o n s i n t o cor- responding r e l a t i o n s that constitutes the structure.. A l l three methods of analysis discussed here are at a d i f f e r e n t stage of s o p h i s t i c a t i o n i n terms of the l o g i c applied';, A d d i t i o n a l l y a l l three methods of analysis are a form of s t r u c t u r a l analysis as opposed to f u n c t i o n a l a n a l y s i s . Levi-Strauss states that the paradigmatic s t r u c t u r a l , analysis comes clos e s t to employing transcendental logic;.. A short h i s - t o r i c a l discussion of the development of these approaches, commencing with functionalism and an ensuing discussion of the l o g i c involved, w i l l c l a r i f y t h i s . . . . Functionalism concentrates more on i n d i v i d u a l symbolic meanings rather, than the s p e c i a l s t r u c t u r a l p o s i t i o n s which give i n d i v i d u a l symbols t h e i r meanings. I t cannot thus apply the p r i n c i p l e of s u b s t i t u t a b i l i t y , 8 unravel transformations or d i s c l o s e rules (Maranda and Kbngas Maranda, 1971:XVii). Radcliffe-Brown sees functionalism as "the attempt to see, s o c i a l l i f e of a people as a whole, as a f u n c t i o n a l unity.." ( R a d c l i f f e - Brown, 1952:185). He distinguishes between structure and function by u s i n g an animal organism as an analogy.? He explains that the animal organism i s an integrated l i v i n g group of c e l l s , e x i s t i n g as a whole, and arranged i n a s t r u c t u r e . In other words, the t o t a l sets of r e l a t i o n s within the organism form the structure, and i t i s through the continuous functioning of the orga- nism that the c o n t i n u i t y of the structure i s preserved (Radcliffe-Brown, 1952:179)* Carvalho-Neto quotes Radcliffe-Brown as saying that function i s the contribution made by part of an a c t i v i t y to the e n t i r e a c t i v i t y of which i t i s a part. Malinowski, who, according to Carvalho-Neto i s the o r i g i n a t o r of the f u n c t i o n a l i s t school, claims function to be the r o l e which the very i n s t i t u t i o n plays i n the t o t a l scheme of c u l t u r e , where " i n s t i t u t i o n i s any f i x e d model of thought or conduct upheld by a group of i n d i v i d u a l s (society) that can be communicated, that enjoys general accept- ance, and whose v i o l a t i o n or change produces a c e r t a i n d i s q u i e t i n the i n d i - v i d u a l or the group" (Carvalho-Neto, 1971:37). Folklore has a function i n a. c u l t u r e , and myths have a function within the f o l k l o r e of that culture,, but we are not only considering the a c t i v i t i e s that e i t h e r myth or f o l k l o r e performs .within i t s p a r t i c u l a r frame of reference. We are i n t e r e s t e d i n considering both the. functions and t h e i r sets of relations-. This, i n other words,.entails a large overview making consideration of the r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n s . o f . i n d i v i d u a l sets of r e l a t i o n s p o s s i b l e . Functionalism tends to concentrate on i n d i v i d u a l symbolic meanings rather than on the s p e c i a l s t r u c t u r a l p o s i t i o n which gives these symbols t h e i r meanings (Leach, 1970: )• 9 The s t a r t i n g point of formalism occurred when a concern with the l i t e r a r y developed i n t o a concern with a narrative's d i s t i n g u i s h i n g features, or motifs. Pure formalism at f i r s t ignored form i n order to comprehend con- tent. Content analysis, or formalism focused on the component parts them- selves, which were obtained by a sophisticated awareness of the comparative im p l i c a t i o n s . In other words, a method of contingency analysis was used i n determining,the r e l a t i v e content of a myth. F i r s t l y the categories i n v o l v i n g empirical.considerations were determined, t h i s u s u a l l y c o n s i s t i n g of a com- plete text or. a p a r t i c u l a r passage of i t . Then the items searched f o r and t h e i r occurrences within the text were noted by symbols. S i g n i f i c a n t con- tingencies were extracted by comparing the percentages of the pimber of occurrences of the noted items and symbols. A contingency r a t i o thus r e - vealed, the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s of these s i g n i f i c a n t contingencies. Content analysis depends on i t s categories f o r v a l i d i t y , and the v a l i d i t y of the categories selected depends upon the analysts s k i l l i s separating these d i f f e r e n t categories (Sebeok, 1957:132). Sebeok d i f f e r e n t i a t e d between con- tent and s t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s . In content analysis the i n v e s t i g a t o r makes statements about the .meaningsof the component parts of a tale,, while i n s t r u c t u r a l analysis he determines the r e l a t i o n s h i p of. these components parts to that of the .whole. He sees the d i s t i n c t i o n between the two techniques as. l y i n g mainly, i n the presence or absence of s t r i c t c r i t e r i a of relevance, Richmond proposed that "content analysis, which involves r e l a t i v e l y loose c r i t e r i a of relevance, i s on a much lower l e v e l of abstraction than i s s t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s , thus appearing vaguer, more f l u i d , more arbitrary,, more subjective," (Sebeok, 1957:132). Since a f a i r l y large amount of s u b j e c t i v i t y i s incorporated i n t o content analysis from the outset, i t cannot be reproduced or tested very e a s i l y . 10 According to Nathorst, Levi-Strauss sees formalism drawing a sharp d i s t i n c t i o n between form and content, as only form i s considered compre- hensible and lends i t s e l f to a n a l y s i s . For example, Kluekholm considers the advantage i n studying form to be that the r e s u l t s can be tested and v e r i f i e d ; e m p i r i c a l l y . The f o r m a l i s t i c approach helps to reveal features common to many of i t s divergent genres. He states that content may vary but. form remains s t a b l e . E r l i c h contented that formalism became structuralism when the formalists disagreed with the concept of form versus content which cut f o l k t a l e i n t o two parts a crude content and a superimposed form:. Instead of-being explored as separate e n t i t i e s , the parts of a t a l e were' viewed as components of a dynamically integrated whole.. Levi-Strauss thus claims that i n structuralism the opposition a r b i t r a r i l y introduced i n formalism has been overcome. Form and content are of the same nature and are mutually dependent upon one another. Since the analysis under consideration are b a s i c a l l y viewed from a s t r u c t u r a l i s t perspective, a more d e t a i l e d examination of structuralism i s . i n order. Piaget sheds a great deal of l i g h t on t h i s complex subject.. F i r s t l y he, states, that "what structuralism i s r e a l l y a f t e r i s to discover n a t u r a l structures" (Piaget, 1970:30). He states that any kind of a ' structure, whether mathematical, b i o l o g i c a l , psychological, etc.; i s composed of three basic ideas;, a) the idea of wholeness,, b) of transformation and c)..of s e l f - r e g u l a t i o n . He goes on to say that a l l s t r u c t u r a l i s t s d i f f e r e n - t i a t e between structures., wholes, and aggregates, "composites formed of elements that are independent of the complexes i n t o which they enter", (Piaget., 1970:7)• .The elements of a structure are subordinated to laws and i t i s i n terms of these laws that the structure i s defined. Furthermore, 11 the properties of the .whole are d i f f e r e n t from the elements which do not e x i s t i n i s o l a t i o n . Piaget f u r t h e r c l a r i f i e s the idea of wholeness when..he points out that there i s another type of whole other.than the atomistic compounding of p r i o r elements, or emergent tota l i t i e s . , , as with these two.options there i s a r i s k of bypassing the very important question of the nature the laws of composition of a whole (Piaget, 1970:7-©*)'. The concept of t h i s other kind of whole i s operational strucuralism,.. In t h i s the. r e l a t i o n s h i p s among the elements are the prime considerations,, rather than the elements themselves. In other words, "the l o g i c a l procedures by which the whole i s formed.are primary" (Piaget, 1970:8-9)».. Piaget states that i f we look at structuralism i n t h i s l i g h t , we can avoid the tr a p of choosing "between.strucureless genesis on the one hand and ungenerated wholes or forms on the other". (Piaget, 1970-9). With regards to transformations, Piaget r e l a t e s t h i s idea to the idea of wholeness, by s t a t i n g that the character of structured wholes de^ pends on t h e i r laws of composition which are defined as governing the transformations of the .system which they st r u c t u r e . (Piaget, 1970:10)? Furthermore, Piaget says that because the elements, of a structure undergo transformation or change, i t i s easy to think of the laws of transformation as. immutable, or innate, e s p e c i a l l y i f one i s not thinking of the whole i n terms.of operational.structuralism. They should be thought of as being simultaneously structured and s t r u c t u r i n g , f o r although they are stable they are s t i l l subject to change. The t h i r d basic property of structures i s s e l f regulation,, which e n t a i l s s e l f maintenance and closure. Piaget believes that "the t r a n s - formations inherent i n a structure never lead beyond the system but always engender elements that belong to i t and preserve i t s laws" (Piaget, 1970:14)* 1 2 S e l f regulation can be achieved i n three ways, noted i n order of increasing complexity.. F i r s t l y we have an operational system which i s a perfect r e - . gulation because i t excludes errors before they are made;. Secondly.we have those transformations which are governed by laws which are not operations because they are not e n t i r e l y r e v e r s i b l e , but depend upon the i n t e r p l a y of a n t i c i p a t i o n , c o r r e c t i o n and are c a l l e d feedback. T h i r d l y Piaget points out that "there are r e g u l a r i t i e s i n the non-technical sense of the word, which depend upon f a r simpler s t r u c t u r a l mechanisms, on rhythnic mechanisms such as pervade biology and human l i f e at every level;.; Rhythm too i s s e l f - r e g u l a t i n g , by v i r t u e of symetries and r e p e t i t i o n s " (Piaget, 1 9 7 0 : 1 6 ) , . With t h i s i n mind, l e t us consider what Piaget says regarding s t r u c t u r a l i s m i n the s o c i a l sciences. He d i f f e r e n t i a t e s between two kinds of structuralism — — global and a n a l y t i c a l . He sees g l o b a l structuralism as dealing with emergent . t o t a l i t i e s , where the whole i s taken as a primary concept.,, or atomistic compounding, where a whole ar i s e d from the union of various elements.. He sees a n a l y t i c a l structuralism as searching f o r the d e t a i l s of t r a n s f o r - mational i n t e r a c t i o n s . ( P i a g e t , 1 9 7 Q : 9 7 ) . To quote Piaget, "whereas glo b a l structuralism holds to systems of observable r e l a t i o n s and interactions., which are regarded as s u f f i c i e n t unto themselves, the p e c u l i a r i t y of authentic ( a n a l y t i c ) structuralism i s that i t seeks to explain such empirical systems by pos t u l a t i n g "deep" structures from.which the former are i n some manner der i v a b l e . Since structures i n t h i s sense of the word are u l t i m a t e l y l o g i c a l - mathematical models of the observed s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s , they, do not themselves belong t o the realm of " f a c t " ... The search f o r deep structures i s a d i r e c t consequence of the i n t e r e s t i n the d e t a i l s of transformational laws (Piaget, 1 9 7 0 : 9 8 ) . 13 A l l three methods of analysis discussed here are at d i f f e r e n t stages.in terms of the l o g i c applied. Piaget sees the structuralism of Levi-Strauss .as a n a l y t i c a l as opposed to g l o b a l , Levi-Strauss i l l u s t r a t e d the development of progressive change i n the a p p l i c a t i o n of these p r i n c i p l e s of l o g i c i n h i s a r t i c l e "The Deduction of the Crane" i n S t r u c t u r a l Analysis of Oral. Tradition,, edited by P i e r r e a n d E l l i Kongas Maranda* (Levi-Strauss states that.the paradigmatic s t r u c t u r a l analysis comes closest to employing transcendental l o g i c ) . Levi-Strauss sees s t r u c t u r a l analysis or the l o g i c applies to investigate myths as deductive, as opposed to i n d u c t i v e . He d i f f e r e n t i a t e s between, two .types of deduction d i r e c t or i n d i r e c t empirical deduction and transcendental deduction. E m p i r i c a l deduction i s based on observation and experiments — on the perception of s i m i l a r i t i e s and contiguities,. Direct, empirical.deduction i s based on analogies, i n d i r e c t on an i n v e r s i o n of these a n a l o g i c a l contents. Transcendental deduction i s based on the following through of associations. The process by which i n d i r e c t empirical deductions, becomes transcendental deduction i s sometimes confusing. Before transcendental deduction can.be employed, an i n d i r e c t empirical deduction must be made, whether, based on accurate observation or imagination:*, Trans- cendental deduction,, states Levi-Strauss, does not r e s t on the t r u t h or falseness of a s i t u a t i o n , but stems from ah awareness of a l o g i c a l necessity; i t r e s t s on a relation.between concepts no longer bound to external r e a l i t y but connected according t o t h e i r c o m p a t i b i l i t i e s and i n c o m p a t i b i l i t i e s i n the architecture of.the mind" (Levi-Strauss, 1966:407). In other words, the awareness of a c e r t a i n l o g i c a l necessity, that of a t t r i b u t i n g c e r t a i n properties to a given subject, takes the i n d i r e c t empirical deduction one 14 step further because i t has previously connected this subject with other properties, or characteristics on the basis of a set of correlative analogies, and,then inverted them. Thus transcendental deduction acquires the features a posteriori.of empirical deduction. Leach also distinguishes two analytical trends in the structural study of folklore, one from Levi-Strauss and the other from Propp,:, or one trend.using.transcendental deduction and the other using empirical deduction respectively. . Propp's study lays out the linear sequential structure of Russian_fairy tales, whereas Levi-Strauss finds the structure of the corpus in question i n paradigms or minimal units as well as i n their syntagmatic combinations to form sequences (Leach, 1970:50)., Dundes further explains or interprets what. Leach has said and further c l a r i f i e s the difference between the two types of a structural analysis that have been mentioned. - F i r s t l y we have Proppian analysis which i s the formal organization ©f a myth as.described by chronologically ordering rhe linear events in the text.. This, process i s called syntagmatic which i s taken.from the idea of syntax in the study of language in reference to Levi-Strauss' concept of parole and lahgue. Secondly we have.a type of structural analysis which i s based on a binary principle of opposition which underlies the myth. This latter type of analysis.is not. similar to: sequential analysis, but instead the elements are. taken out of â  given order and are regrouped in one or more analytic schema, Dundes explains that Levi-Strauss calls these patterns or'organiza- tions, in this kind., of structural analysis paradigmatic,, meaning borrowed from the.study of paradigms in the study of language... It i s in this second type of analysis that oppositions are mediated and conflicts resolved through the employment of, as Levi-Strauss defines i t , transcendental logic. 15 Furthermore, the l i n e a r sequential structure or manifest content.is the more obvious, the paradigmatic or l a t e n t structure i s the more important.. (Dundes,. 1968:xii). Levi-Strauss emphasized that i t i s every analysts duty to penetrate, the s u p e r f i c i a l l i n e a r structure to the r e a l underlying para- digmatic schema. He also stated that the syntagmatic approach,, although duplicated more, e a s i l y , tends to be empirical and inductive,, while i n . con- • t r a s t , the paradigmatic approach, while d i f f i c u l t to replicate,, i s specu- l a t i v e and deductive. Dundes thinks that the subject of content i s one of. the most im p o r t a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n emphasis.between syntagmatic .and.-para- digmatic, .analysis. He. states that "where the text i s i s o l a t e d from i t s . s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l context, a f o r m a l i s i t c s t r u c t u r a l analysis, i s as s t e r i l e as motif ...hunting and. word (Dundes, 1968:xii). Although Levi-Strauss t r i e s to. r e l a t e the paradigms he f i n d s to the world i n general,,, i t . i s perhaps, too subjective. The...subjectivity must be contained within a more r e l i a b l e framework, so that r e s u l t s obtained can be compared arid the a n a l y s i s - r e - produced. ..Furthermore, paradigmatic analysis as applied by Levi-Strauss may f a l l i n t o the t r a p of becoming timespace bound. For example,, the v a r i a b l e s subject to change are the corpora and the culture i n consideration.. There is. nothing that.can be sued, as a point of reference as his p r i n c i p l e of binary oppositions would depend upon the analyst's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n .re- l a t i o n to..his own l o g i c a l framework, and therefore, there is.no way of determining..the amount _of change i n h i s method of a n a l y s i s . The completeness and accuracy of t h i s type of analysis may be proportionate.to the .amount and kind of the. analyst's knowledge of the culture i n question,. as-'-well as the culture's r e l a t i v e and coincident p o s i t i o n i n a changing world., ..Mary..Douglas has an idea s i m i l a r to the above. She states that structural, analysis cannot but r e v e a l myths as synchronic structures 16 outside time. She fi n d s that Levi-Strauss' analysis contain biases b u i l t i n t o the methods of analysis and consequently f e e l s that we cannot deduce anything from.the analysis about the attitudes to time p r e v a i l i n g i n the cultures i n question. I f myths have an i r r e v e r s i b l e order which i s s i g n i - f i c a n t , this, part of the.meaning w i l l escape the analysis,. She emphasizes that s t r u c t u r a l methods of analysis.should be tested against a background of known ethnographic material, so that we can see the thoroughness of the method., the relevance of the formulae, how i t helps the understanding of the culture i n question, and l a s t l y the degree of r e p l i c a b i l i t y of the method. (Mary Douglas., 67:65). Dundes also notes the p o t e n t i a l f o r error in. the. s t r u c t u r a l i s t method when he says i t i s important that a text from ethnographic.material be. l o g i c a l l y r e l a t e d to the culture i n which the analysis i s . a p p l i e d . Since each, culture exhibits a c e r t a i n l o g i c a l frame- work, to incorporate, a new concept from another l o g i c a l framework,' sometimes i t must f i r s t be t r a n s l a t e d i n t o terminology that can be encompassed by the f i r s t . p a r t i c u l a r l o g i c a l framework i n question. Another t r a n s l a t i o n back through the process should f a c i l i t a t e an accurate communication,. However, not all.concepts can be incorporated i n t o a l l l o g i c a l frameworks. Thus many, basic errors begin at t h i s i n i t i a l l e v e l , and are often compounded at furthe r stages of t h e i r a n a l y s i s , and an accurate conclusion or statement becomes impossible. Mary Douglas..sees two objectives i n analyzing a piece of folklore,. The. f i r s t i s to.analyse what has been sai d , (content) and the second i s ' t o analyse the languages seen.as an instrument of what i s said (form). These two.objectives aim at discovering a p a r t i c u l a r structure as opposed to being r e d u c t i o n i s t of y i e l d i n g a compressed statement of the theme. She sees 17 Levi-Strauss as claiming to reveal the formal structure of myths but never putting aside his i n t e r e s t i n what the myth discourse i s about. Therefore, she .sees a r e d u c t i o n i s t tendency b u i l t i n t o Levi-Strauss' structuralism. When..applying Levi-Strauss' method of structuralism the anthropologist must apply his p r i o r knowledge of the culture to h i s a n a l y s i s . This does l i t t l e good i f we know very l i t t l e about the culture from which a myth i s taken. M e l v i l l e Jacob's viewpoint i s another Very relevant to t h i s exercise.; He concludes that a normative or evaluative approach should be avoided because any. non-native of a s p e c i f i c culture lacks s u f f i c i e n t c u l t u r a l background as well, as necessary heritage and aesthetic values to be able to give an accurate i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , of the approach as applied to that c u l t u r e . ..The.field of o r a l t r a d i t i o n has been described, the main perpetra- to r of f o l k l o r i c exploration discussed, and an out l i n e of the development of the d i f f e r e n t a n a l y t i c a l approaches given from functionalism to structuralism.. We s h a l l , now take.a more intense look at the three operational approaches and the two corpora to which they are applied as mentioned at the beginning of t h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n . ... An i n depth.study of ten myths from each culture may r e v e a l what is.n o t already, obvious from a subjective viewpoint, and might lend i n s i g h t into, the„construction and narrative art of f o l k t a l e s . We believe that the aesthetic.value of a myth i s not determined by any of i t s component parts i n i s o l a t i o n , but by t h e i r synthesis i n t o an integrated whole. The dismantling of a myth in t o i t s component parts f o r the purpose of discovering some general p r i n c i p a l by which to explain the rai s o n d'etre of a myth or of f o l k t a l e s i n general, i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of recent f o l k l o r i c s tudies. These component parts that make up the whole of the myth have been 18 the object of study and are s t i l l of concern i n the methods discussed here... In t r y i n g to. discover a. stable l e v e l on which these component parts can be worked r a i s e s a problem. On the one hand t o what extent can we break down a myth without destroying a core that i s v i t a l to the culture i n which.it i s found,, yet on the other hand, i n order to compare myths cross c u l t u r a l l y a r e l a t i v e l y constant and sophisticated l e v e l of abstraction must be obtained,. This, .includes a breakdown i n t o component pa r t s . Perhaps the abstracts generated.in.this analysis w i l l r e v e a l the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s of these parts i n r e l a t i o n to the e n t i r e whole, as w e l l as determine a l e v e l of abstraction that avoids reducing a myth to only i t s component p a r t s . The way i n which the component parts of a myth are determined i s of paramount importance. Therefore any anthropologists determination of such should be.made clear at t h i s point. Conceptually these component parts are single incidents or actions that can have an interdependent existence. The following, analogy may exemplify.this concept. Each component part of a t a l e i s s i m i l a r to a sentence structure subject, verb and object as opposed r e s p e c t i v e l y to. actor action..and actor object. In other words i t , i s each action of the dramatis, personae that .defines the component parts of the tale,; The Marandas reveal t h e i r concept of single incidents to be ver b a l propositions, contingent upon the reduction of the t a l e i n t o separate actions re v o l v i n g around the f i r s t c r i t e r i o n or main actor. E i t h e r of these v e r b a l propositions^can e i t h e r exist.by themselves as an episode,, depending upon the mediating aspect, within the myth. Each episode i s described by a model; This model is., contingent upon the f i n a l outcome of a p a r t i c u l a r episode as opposed to i t s i n i t i a l s t a t e . Each step through t h i s t r a n s i t i o n i s described by a sin g l e incident or verbal proposition and the outcome of each episode i s 1 9 determined-by the.use of a mediator which i s "the e s p e c i a l l y f i t t e d agent which ensures.the passage from an i n i t i a l state to a d i f f e r e n t f i n a l outcome" (Maranda, E.K....and P., 1 9 6 9 : 8 ) . . . . , Armstrong describes these s i n g l e incidents as u n i t s of behaviour, or an act"which consists of three parts, an actor, an action and another actor who.is the r e c i p i e n t of the act i o n . L a s t l y , Propp r e f e r s t o these sin g l e incidents as the smallest n a r r a t i v e u n i t s or motifs, which are de- scribed in. terms of t h e i r functions. "Function i s understood as an act of a character, defined from the point of view of i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r the course, of the ac t i o n " (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 2 1 ) . In other words, the functions of the dramatis personae are the basic components of a t a l e , A number of functions, constitute a move, seve r a l of which may be found i n one t a l e . Mediation, or the connective i n c i d e n t , as Propp defines i t i s also pertinent t o . t h i s method of analysis although used i n a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t context than in. Marandas' method of a n a l y s i s . In the Marandas' analysis the medi- ative aspect is. necessary f o r determining the type of model, i t i s not . necessary f o r each move in. Propp 1s a n a l y s i s . More emphasis i s put upon the mediative aspect.in the Marandas' method of analysis than i n the other two types, of a n a l y s i s . However, the important point i s that the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r a. move, i n Propp's analysis are s i m i l a r to those f o r an episode i n Marandas' an a l y s i s , The difference l i e s i n the f a c t that episodes are described by. f i v e of these descriptive, types of models (0 to IV i n c l u s i v e ) and.there can be.any number of these i n a t a l e , depending upon the mediation i n the t a l e . Also,, moves are. described i n a numerical l i n e a r sequence., 1 , , 1 1 , 1 1 1 , . , e t c . . There, can be many, moves i n one t a l e , but u s u a l l y the number of moves depends upon more functions than j u s t mediation; However, the diffe r e n c e mentioned i n each method of analysis are inherent i n each. Propp's methods 20 seem.to be more linear in comparison to Marandas' and lends i t s e l f to pro- ducing fewer moves than Marandas1 analysis does episodes. Since each individual method of analysis w i l l be discussed in detail at the beginnings of chapters 2, 3 and 4, a very brief outline of each shall suffice at this point. Marandas' method of analysis.is based on the excerpt in abridged form, "Structural Models in Folklore" from Structural Models in Folklore and Transformational Essays by E. Kongas Maranda and P. Maranda. Each myth' i s separated into.episodes, established by the reduction of the tale into different actions or verbal propositions revolving around the main actor, that dramatis personae who i s mentioned most often in the myth.,, who i s dis- covered, through the means of a frequency and contingency table, Each verbal proposition contains a complete act within i t s e l f , and i n order to become an episode, a reason to.attempt mediation, or an attempt i t s e l f (whether successful, or not) must exist. Thus, i f the tale i s long, there may be as many^as.twelve episodes. After a l l the tales have been subjected to this method of analysis, .the models abstracted are compared and contrasted,.. Armstrong.uses a simplified metalanguage to interpret folktales. His ..model used as the., basis for the segmentation of the myths i s divided, into, six basic and general categories, such as objectives pertaining to permission, and prohibition, resistance and attack, the conduct of affairs., e t c These are stated i n terms of units of behaviour which consist of three, parts,..ah actor designated by X, and action and an additional actor.,, designated by Y, towards or against whom the action i s directed'. A new act i s initiated when there i s any change in the actor or action constellation of the tale. The main unit of concern contained within the nine basic 2 1 categories i s designated by a symbol of action or what Armstrong c a l l s dramatic behaviour. These symbols, once abstracted from the texts,, form meta l i n g u i s t i c s t r i n g s . . These are.then compared and contrasted with each other. The..final method of analysis i s taken from Propp, The Morphology of the F o l k t a l e . .In h i s type of analysis the organization of a t a l e i s described as following the chronological order of the l i n e a r sequence of elements i n the t e x t . This d i f f e r s from Armstrong's method i n that Armstrong's categories are not n e c e s s a r i l y applied i n a chronological order,, whereas t h i s i s e s s e n t i a l to a r e p l i c a b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of Propp,. His method of analysis u t i l i z e s the alphabet following A through Z. The functions of A to Z and v a r i a t i o n s of them represent the acts of the dramatis personae defined i n r e l a t i o n s h i p to the cause of the a c t i o n . For instance the A's and v a r i a t i o n s Of, i t . represent, d i f f e r e n t forms of y i l l a n y , the B's and i t s v a r i a t i o n s r e - present, d i f f e r e n t forms of mediation, arid so on. The myths are also separated in t o d i f f e r e n t moves, these being contingent upon each new act of v i l l a n y or each new lack.. Functions that end a move are those employed as a denouement., such.as marriage, reward, t h e . l i q u i d a t i o n of misfortunes or escape from pur- s u i t . The s e r i e s of m e t a l i n g u i s t i c s t r i n g s thus abstracted are compared and contrasted. . The conclusion w i l l contain three d i f f e r e n t considerations;., F i r s t l y , each a n a l y s e s method of-analysis w i l l be compared and contrasted i n r e l a t i o n to what the. other methods reveal, and the questions posed i n the i n t r o d u c t i o n . Secondly, the corpus of Beaver and Alaskan myths w i l l be examined separately as seen from each analyst's viewpoint. T h i r d l y , the three a n a l y t i c a l frameworks 22 w i l l be compared and contrasted. What each approach makes e x p l i c i t as seen through the a p p l i c a t i o n to two d i f f e r e n t corpora w i l l be made apparent.. Thus the abstracts generated i n each.case can be contrasted and compared with the other two. Some questions to be kept i n mind while working the analyses are whether or.not the methods of analysis r e v e a l the rules governing formation, organization and development of a myth, and the mechanisms f o r shortening or lengthening a myth, arid the kind of structuralism applied,. Also we might be aware whether or not the analyses r e v e a l u n i v e r s a l questions such as the f i n a l i t y of death, the o r i g i n of man, whether on a conscious or unconscious l e v e l . . Hopefully the r e s u l t s obtained may lead to a f u l l e r understanding of the problems of composition and dissemination of oral, tradition,.. The three methods of analysis were chosen because each separately supplied, a foundation f o r i t s f u r t h e r p r a c t i c e and examination,.,.. These approaches i n v i t e a p p l i c a t i o n to corpora and therefore c r i t i c i s m as w e l l . They served f o r a time to define legitimate problems and methods of a research f i e l d for. succeeding generation of f o l k l o r i s t s . Furthermore,.the three methods of analysis.have been s u f f i c i e n t l y unprecedented to attract.an enduring group of adherents away from competing types of f o l k l o r e analyses,./ Simultaneously, they are open ended enough to leave many problems f o r the pr a c t i t i o n e r s , to resolve. Propp's, Armstrong's and the Marandas' analyses help form a base i n t h e i r f i e l d , without which progress i n t h i s area would be severely retarded.. 2 3 CHAPTER I I APPLICATION OF PROPP'S METHOD OF ANALYSIS II 1 . ) INTRODUCTION The t i t l e of Propp's book, Morphology of the F o l k t a l e , gives us the f i r s t understanding of his concept of the study of f o l k l o r e , as "the word morphology means the study of forms. In botany, the term morphology means the study of the component parts of a plant, of t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p , t o each other and to the whole — — i n other words, the study of a plant's st r u c t u r e " (Propp, 1 9 6 8:XXV). Propp's method of analysis i s derived from a group of f a i r y t a l e s contained i n a c o l l e c t i o n of four hundred texts by A. N. Afansev. F a i r y t a l e s , according to Propp are those t a l e s c l a s s i f i e d by Aarne tinder., numbers 2 0 0 to 7 4 9 or "any development proceeding from the function v i l l a n y (A) or lack.(a) through intermediary function to marriage (w) or to other functions employed as a denouement" (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 9 2 ) , , Propp's method of separating the t a l e i n t o i t s component parts i s somewhat vague. Therefore, t h i s should be c l a r i f i e d or standardized now i n r e l a t i o n to the f o l l o w i n g applications a of h i s analysis,... Propp's t a l e s are separated i n t o . t h i r t y - o n e functions. Function, according to Propp i s "an act of a character defined from the point of view of i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r the course of the action of a t a l e as a whole" (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 2 1 ) , Moreover, "functions are composed of various themes, a se r i e s of motifs, something o r g a n i c a l l y whole,..that can be singled out from a number of other themes and studied independently" (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 9 ) . However, a theme i s composed of a subject, verb and predicate and the subject and object define the theme while the verb forms the composition. Propp states that the extraction of themes from a t a l e i s l e f t to the analyst, since purely objective abstrac- t i o n has not yet been r e f i n e d . 2 4 Motifs, according to Propp, are the simplest narrative u n i t that represents a l o g i c a l whole, and a complex Of such compose a theme (Propp, 1 9 . 6 8 : 1 2-18). Since motifs can move i n and out of themes., Propp states that motifs are of a primary concern, themes secondary* Although Propp states that motifs.can be f u r t h e r reduced to d i f f e r e n t elements., which do not represent a l o g i c a l , whole, i t i s with motifs that he concerns himself.. These make up the component parts of a t a l e . In h i s analysis the makeup of the. theme.was used as a guideline i n determining the motifs,. Since one motif i s used from each function f o r each move i n s e t t i n g out the l i n e a r sequence of a t a l e , t h i s i s a rather stable and r e p l i c a b l e method of de- termining motifs. Propp begins i s analysis by d e f i n i n g the method and materials.,. His f i r s t four rules are very important, and are as follows: l ) "Functions of characters serve as stable, constant elements i n a tale,, independent of how and by whom they are f u l f i l l e d . They constitute the fundamental com- ponents of a t a l e " Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 2 1 ) . The dramatis personae may change but t h e i r act ions.or functions do not (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 2 0 ) . Thus, as Propp states,,, a. t a l e often, a t t r i b u t e s i d e n t i c a l actions to various characters, ; What the dramatis personae do. i s an important question. Propp states that the functions of. the dramatis personae are basic components of a tale,.. but the d e f i n i t i o n of them does not depend upon the. dramatis' personae who c a r r i e s out the function, nor can.an action be defined separately from i t s place i n the course of ..the. narration ( p g . 2 l ) . In other words, the dramatis personae are l i k e a c a t a l y s t , necessary f o r , but not a f f e c t i n g or becoming a part of the. outcome, because what.is done i s of concern, rather than who does i t , , or how. 2 ) "The number of functions known to the f a i r y t a l e i s l i m i t e d " (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 2 1 ) . As mentioned e a r l i e r , there are thirty-one functions, each 2 5 of. which contain a number of motifs. 3 ) "The sequence of functions i s always i d e n t i c a l " (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 2 2 ) . This r u l e must be applied i f we are to complete a uniform a n a l y s i s . Two d i f f e r e n t dramatis personae can f u l f i l l the .same f u n c t i o n . This however would more than l i k e l y be found i n two d i f f e r e n t places in.the myth. Also, we can f i n d the same action at d i f f e r e n t places i n a. t a l e . These two examples would constitute two d i f f e r e n t functions and therefore have two d i f f e r e n t meanings although.the actions and even the dramatis personae are the same.. Thus as Propp states,, the order of the functions found i n the t a l e i s . v e r y important although he does allow that, there are a few exceptions to t h i s r u l e . Furthermore,, he says that "the means by which functions are f u l f i l l e d influence one another and that i d e n t i c a l forms adapt themselves to d i f f e r e n t functions:.:. A c e r t a i n form i s . t r a n s f e r r e d to. a d i f f e r e n t p o s i t i o n , acquiring a new meaning,, or simultaneously r e t a i n i n g an. o l d one" (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 7 0 ) • Moreover, the sequence of functions i s important because i f , f o r instance,, a character such...'as a donor i s missing from a t a l e , the form of h i s appearance can oftentimes be t r a n s f e r r e d to the next character i n line,, 4 ) " A l l f a i r y t a l e s are of one type i n regard to t h e i r structure" (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 2 2 ) . , In other words, t a l e s with i d e n t i c a l , functions can be considered as belonging to one type, and according to Propp, on t h i s basis an index of types can be created. Propp continues the explanation of his method of analysis by erir- umerating the functions.of the dramatis personae.. He gives a b r i e f summary of each function's essence.and i t s symbol. Some of these are described i n the following paragraph. Propp's t a l e u s u a l l y begins with a preparatory section, .the f i r s t of which i s ah i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n . Here the members of a family are enumerated 2 6 or the future, hero i s introduced.. There are eight other morphological elements i n the preparatory section,, a l l of which prepare the way f o r the most important function i n the t a l e , v i l l a n y or a lack. However., Propp does not include the i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n , or a preliminary misfortune when he discusses h i s seven functions. Of these remaining functions he states that " a l l seven functions of t h i s section are never encountered within one t a l e " and therefore an absence cannot be considered an omission (Propp, 19.68:108). Furthermore, Propp creates three sets of p a i r s within his section of eight, functions, i n t e r d i c t i o n and v i o l a t i o n , reconnaissance and r e c e i p t of information, and d e c e i t f u l persuasions arid submission to suchv By. means of these functions the actual movement of the t a l e i s begun (Propp,.. 1 9 6 8 : 3 0 ) . . Since not a l l myths begin with, a misfortune,, some are considered to be at the. same state as a morphological equivalent, of seizure.., Propp points out that i n s u f f i c i e n c y , as does seizure, determines the next point i n the complication (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 3 5 ) . The second function, mediation., i s also important as i t brings the herb i n t o the t a l e . Here Propp d i f f e r e n - t i a t e s between, hero seekers and v i c t i m i z e d heroes. Seeker heroes u s u a l l y have a search, a s . t h e i r goal and leave home of t h e i r own accord. .Victimized heroes u s u a l l y s t a r t on a jourriey and leave home w i l l i n g l y * An example w i l l c l a r i f y the above. I f _a Chief's daughter i s kidnapped,, and the narr a t i v e follows a brother's search f o r her, the hero i s the brother,, a seeker-herov However,.if the daughter i s kidnapped and the thread of the na r r a t i v e i s li n k e d to her f a t e , she. i s a v i c t i m i z e d hero. Propp emphasizes that the morphological s i g n i f i c a n c e of the hero i s very important^ since his inte n t i o n s create the .axis of the n a r r a t i v e . A hero he states, " i s that character who eit h e r d i r e c t l y s u f f e r s from the action of the v i l l a i n in.the complication (the one who senses some kind of lack) or who agrees to l i q u i d a t e the 27 t h e m i s f o r t u n e o r l a c k o f a n o t h e r p e r s o n . I n t h e c o u r s e o f t h e a c t i o n . t h e h e r o . i s t h e p e r s o n who i s s u p p l i e d w i t h a m a g i c a l agent and who makes u s e o f i t o r i s . s e r v e d by i t " ( P r o p p , 1968:50). A n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t group o f f u n c t i o n s a r e D ( t h e f i r s t f u n c t i o n o f t h e . d o n o r ) E ( r e a c t i o n o f t h e h e r o ) and F ( t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o r r e c e i p t o f a m a g i c a l a g e n t ) , w h e r e i n t h e h e r o i s t e s t e d , i n t e r r o g a t e d , etc., b e f o r e he r e c e i v e s a m a g i c a l agent o r h e l p e r . P r o p p d i f f e r e n t i a t e s between.two t y p e s o f c o n n e c t i o n s , b a s e d on t h e f o r m o f t r a n s m i s s i o n o f a m a g i c a l a gent* S i m p l y . p u t , i n t y p e 1 t h e donors a r e u n f r i e n d l y o r d e c e i v e d , i n t y p e I I t h e d o n o r s . a r e f r i e n d l y and p r o v i s i o n a l . P r o p p n o t e s t h a t o b j e c t s o f t r a n s m i s s i o n a r e . n o t n e c e s s a r i l y c o n n e c t e d t o forms o f t r a n s m i s s i o n s , . . I n o t h e r w ords, a h o r s e i s n o t always g i v e n , sometimes i t i s seized;., P r o p p c a r e f u l l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e s between t h e H ( t h e h e r o e s s t r u g g l e w i t h , t h e . v i l l a i n ) arid I ( V i c t o r y o y e r t h e v i l l a i n ) f u n c t i o n and t h e M ( d i f f i c u l t t a s k ) and N ( r e s o l u t i o n o f a d i f f i c u l t task).-.. I n d i s t i n g u i s h - i n g ..between H I , MN o r DEF P r o p p reminds us t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o d e f i n e a f u n c t i o n a c c o r d i n g t o Its consequences. He g i v e s t h e f o l l o w i n g summation: " a l l t a s k s . g i v i n g r i s e t o a s e a r c h must be c o n s i d e r e d i n t e rms o f B, a l l t a s k s g i v i n g . r i s e . t o . t h e r e c e i p t o f a m a g i c a l agent a r e c o n s i d e r e d as D. A l l o t h e r t a s k s a r e c o n s i d e r e d as M. ( P r o p p , 1968:67),. The f a i r y t a l e r e a c h e s i t s c l i m a x w i t h f u n c t i o n K ( i n i t i a l m i s f o r - tune, o r l a c k l i q u i d a t e d ) . From h e r e t h e t a l e i s u s u a l l y b r o u g h t t o a c l o s e by. t e r m i n a l f u n c t i o n s s u c h as K i t s e l f , o r escape f r o m p u r s u i t , , Rs,; o r m a r r i a g e u n l e s s a n o t h e r move i s i n i t i a t e d w i t h a n o t h e r v i l l a n y o r lack,, P r o p p n o t e s t h a t many f u n c t i o n s j o i n t o g e t h e r i n t o one o f s e v e n s p h e r e s o f a c t i o n . These a r e t h e s p h e r e s o f a c t i o n o f t h e . . v i l l a i n , , w h i c h i s composed o f f u n c t i o n s A ( v i l l a n y ) , H ( f i g h t w i t h h e r o ) and P r ( p u r s u i t ) . 28 The other s i x are the sphere of action of the donor, of the helper, of a princess, the dispatcher, the hero, and the f a l s e hero. According to Propp, these spheres of action can be d i s t r i b u t e d among the t a l e charac- t e r i s t i c s i n three d i f f e r e n t ways. F i r s t l y , the sphere of action corresponds to the characters involved; secondly, one character i s involved i n several spheres of action, and t h i r d l y , a sphere of action can be shared by several characters (Propp., 1 9 6 8 : 8 1 ) . When. Propp discusses the t a l e as a.whole, he emphasizes that a development from A through H i s considered as one move, arid each new v i l l a r i y or lack.within the same t a l e constitutes a new move,. Propp states that s i n g l i n g out a move with exactitude i s possib l e , although not always easy., as moves may interweave, repeat each other several times and so on.. These, h i g h l i g h t s of Propp's method of ana l y s i s , as discussed above.,,, may be u s e f u l f o r reference when applying h i s an a l y s i s . 29 I I 2. i PROPP, BEAVER ANALYSIS AND NOTES #1. The Frog and the Owl Move I n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n i n t r o d u c t i o n 1 AJ 1 H 1 § 1 C kidnapping of a person announcement of misfortune connectives consent to counteraction 1 T departure from dispatch of hero from home Old man Owl's daughter i s missing Old Man Owl t e l l s h i s wife his wife makes many comments Old Man Owl decides t o ask L i t t l e Owl to help f i n d her 1 *D other requests, with preliminary L i t t l e Owl asks f o r drymeat before helpless s i t u a t i o n of person he leaves on h i s search making the request 1 E' request f u l f i l l e d 1 K F 2 object of the search i s pointed out Old Man Owl feeds him w e l l L i t t l e Owl f i n d s Old Man Owls daughter's footsteps leading i n t o the lake but he i s unable to follow them 1 TD departure (of the hero) Old Man Owl sends his son (second donor) to f i n d his s i s t e r 1 E r e a c t i o n of acting hero hi s dialogue with the other birds-, and the forewarning. Woodpecker B i r d advises Owl Boy not to go to the end of the lake 3 0 Move 1 KF 2 the object of the search i s He hears his sister and t e l l s his pointed out father where to find her 1 T departure of the real hero Old Man Owl leaves in search of his daughter His son leads Old Man Owl to where he heard his sister crying 1 GJ Hero i s led 1 H Hero struggles with v i l l a i n Old Man Owl fights with the Frog Chief to free his daughter 1 I J victory over the v i l l a i n Old Man Owl defeats Frog Chief 1 KF object of the search i s captured return of the hero 19 I I A A declaration of war II Pr pursuit of hero II Rs rescue Old Man Owl seizes his daughter and escapes He returns home with his daughter The Frogs declare War on the Birds The Frogs make war so that they can recapture Old Man Owl's daughter Old Man Owl i s saved from being destroyed II U punishment of Villain(s) The Frog army i s defeated and punished, and only one frog i s spared to t e l l the story . . 3 1 - . Old Man Owl could be c a l l e d the seeker-hero, as he implements the search, f o r . h i s daughter, at his wife's suggestion. Because he i s old,, he i s at f i r s t unable to search f o r her, and sends two others i n his stead* . . The function of departure i s t r a n s f e r r e d twice, onee to L i t t l e Owl and once, t o Owl Boy. Although Propp states that a donor i s u s u a l l y acquired a c c i d e n t a l l y , i n t h i s case Old Man Owl makes a d i r e c t request to L i t t l e Owl* The donor appears i n the t a l e a l i t t l e sooner than i n the Russian f a i r y tales,,, but the order.has remained astDEF because L i t t l e Owl and Owl Boy were also performing those functions that were s p e c i f i c f o r the hero i n t h i s tale.;., Thus we. have two donors, L i t t l e Owl and Owl Boy. The t h i r d attempt to rescue Old Man Owl^s daughter i s suc c e s s f u l . This t r e b l i n g e f f e c t of DEF i s quite common i n f a i r y t a l e s . Propp gives an example of t r e b l i n g of en t i r e moves g i r l abducted, two ...elder brothers set out to look f o r her and f a i l to f i n d her f i r s t and second moves, i n the t h i r d move the youngest brother succeeds i n f i n d i n g his s i s t e r . In t h i s myth, two people (one the father's friend,, the other, father's son) set out to search f o r Old Man Owl's daughter and f a i l . , and Old Man Owl succeeds i n the t h i r d attempt. ( I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note the switch i n emphasis from brothers i n the Russian s t o r i e s to Father.,. Son and others i n the Beaver myths). The two DEF sequences are not considered separated moves i n t h i s myth because they are not c a r r i e d through t o degree of ..completion, nor i s there a new lack or a new villany.. Upon looking at the. two me t a l i n g u i s t i c s t r i n g s , i t also appears that DEKF i s a weaker form of *DEKF1. The return of Old Man Owl with h i s daughter i s tantamount to f o r c i n g the Frogs to.declare war. The .two.functions have a cause-effect r e l a t i o n - ship, but with a new A function another move i s created. 32 #2 The Boy Wabshu Move 1 °^ I n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n 1 B death of parents 1 request f o r favour a f t e r death 3 1 E favour to a dead person 1 F the agent i s not tra n s f e r r e d 1 7f*~ d e c e i t f u l persuasions by the v i l l a i n 3 1 § the hero gives i n to the persuasions of the v i l l a i n g 1 A demand f o r d e l i v e r y , enticement abduction 5 1 B transportation of banished hero 1 ^ departure of the hero 2 1 D greeting and int e r r o g a t i o n 2 1 E f r i e n d l y response agent pointed out introduction . Wabshu's mother dies Wabshu's mother requests her husband to f i n d a good step-mother f o r Wabshu, one from where the sun i s at dinner time Wabshu's father t r i e s to f i n d a good mother but i s unable t o , so he buys a wife from where the sun sets Wabshu's father finds a wife from where the sun sets Wabshu's stepmother persuades him to shoot rabbits i n the head Wabshu does as she bi d s . His step- mother then puts the rabbits under her dress so that they scratch her, legs Wabshu's father pretends to take hirru. hunting, but takes him by canoe to a deserted i s l a n d instead. Wabshu's stepmother wanted t o get him i n t o trouble Wabshu i s taken by canoe Wabshu t r a v e l s by canoe to the i s l a n d Nahata inquires why Wabshu i s crying and comforts him Wabshu responds p o s i t i v e l y Nahata points out ducks, geese arid p i t c h i n which to catch them 3 3 1 KJ l i q u i d a t i o n of misfortune through Wabshu escapes, leaving his father a p p l i c a t i o n of cunning to perform the d i f f i c u l t task of s u r v i v a l as he had done return of the hero Wabshu takes the canoe and leaves his father on i s l a n d f o r ten days to force him to survive as he was, However, h i s father dies instead 1 U punishment of v i l l a i n Wabshu k i l l s h i s stepmother I I i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n Wabshu takes up with the monster O n l i Nachi 17 II A threat of cannibalism O n l i Nachi threatens to his Wabshu's people II H hero struggles with v i l l a i n Wabshu t r i e s to prevent O n l i Nachi from chasing people II I v i c t o r y over v i l l a i n Wabshu argues and struggles with O n l i Nachi and f i n a l l y shoots her II K l i q u i d a t i o n of misfortune threat of cannabalism extinguished II T 1 new p h y s i c a l appearance Wabshu changes i n t o Usakindji", and then changes i n t o stone Notes: .. . ... Wabshu. becomes, the. v i c t i m i z e d hero i n t h i s t a l e as he suff e r s from the. action.of the v i l l a i n i n the complication. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that t h i s t a l e conforms tb_Propp's r u l e regarding parent senders., Propp describes.a daughter transported-from home by the father,, upon banishment by the.stepmother. In t h i s case we have a son, banished through h i s stepmother's t r i c k e r y . 34 I n t h i s myth we have an example o f t h e DEF sequence b e f o r e t h e A f u n c t i o n . The donor i n t h i s s e c t i o n i s Wabshu's mother, whereas t h e donor i n t h e second DEF sequence i s Nah a t a . T h i s f i r s t d onor i n t r o d u c e s t h e main d r a m a t i s p e r s o n a e , and a l s o seems t o be an i n t e n s i f i e d v e r s i o n o f i n t e r - d i c t i o n and v i o l a t i o n . The appearance o f Na h a t a i s a v e r y good example o f what Propp c a l l s a. weakened form o f t e s t i n g . D i r e c t t e s t i n g and i n t e r r o g a t i o n a r e absent,. N a h a t a appears i n a dream and c o m f o r t s him. I n t h i s example, Wabshu i s not. r e a l l y , g i v e n t h e c h o i c e , o f a n s w e r i n g r u d e l y , t h e r e b y r e c e i v i n g n o t h i n g from t h e d o n o r , as Na h a t a appears i n a dream. However, Wabshu d e m o n s t r a t e s h i s p o s i t i v e r e s p o n s e when he awakes by a c t i n g upon t h e a d v i s e o f Nahata*, The n a r r a t i v e peaks when Wabshu e s c a p e s . He does t h i s by way o f canoe,, the. same mode o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n by w h i c h he came t o t h e i s l a n d , * P r o p p s t a t e s , t h a t " a r e t u r n i s g e n e r a l l y a c c o m p l i s h e d by means o f t h e same f o r m as an a r r i v a l " ( P r o p p , 1968:55) There, a r e two s e p a r a t e t a l e s f o u n d h e r e i n t h i s r a t h e r t h a n one,. each w i t h one move, r a t h e r t h a n one t a l e w i t h two moves,. A l t h o u g h a new V i l l a n y f a c i l i t a t e s a.new.move, t h e c o u r s e o f e v e n t s a r e e n t i r e l y s e p a r a t e from.one a n o t h e r i n e a c h t a l e . T h e r e a r e two s e p a r a t e themes,, and one i s n o t a v a r i a n t o f t h e o t h e r . However, i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o compare themes and v a r i a n t s . . h e r e i n r e l a t i o n t o P r o p p as. he r e a l l y sees f a i r y t a l e s as a c h a i n o f v a r i a n t s A l s o t h e second myth seems t o be a r a t h e r i n c o m p l e t e v e r s i o n o f a n o t h e r l o n g e r myth, w i t h no r e l a t i o n t o t h e p r e v i o u s myth e x c e p t t h a t t h e Heroes a r e t h e same c h a r a c t e r s , and j o i n e d by two words., " a f t e r that",., T h i s i s s i m i l a r t o t h e c o n t i n u i n g t a l e s o f U s a k i n d j i , where each new e x - p e r i e n c e i s c o n s i d e r e d a new t a l e . 35 #3 U s a k i n d j i and The W o l v e r i n e Man Move 1 ^ i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n i n t r o d u c t i o n 17 1 A t h r e a t o f c a n n i b a l i s m 1 B m e d i a t i o n c o n n e c t i v e i n c i d e n t 1 T departure U s a k i n d j i d i s c o v e r s a t r a p s e t t o c a t c h p e o p l e i n i t i a t i v e , he d e c i d e s t o f i n d out who s e t t h e t r a p U s a k i n d j i p u t s h i m s e l f i n t o t h e p i t t o a w a i t W o l v e r i n e Man 1 § c o n n e c t i v e s U s a k i n d j i p r e t e n d s t o be dead 1 G t h e h e r o i s c a r r i e d W o l v e r i n e Man c a r r i e s U s a k i n d j i home t o h i s f a m i l y 1 H c o n t e s t 1 I t h e k i l l i n g o f t h e v i l l a i n w i t h o u t a f i g h t U s a k i n d j i p r e t e n d s he i s dead u n t i l he sees an o p p o r t u n i t y t o k i l l W o l v e r i n e Man and h i s f a m i l y U s a k i n d j i k i l l s them b e f o r e t h e y have a chance t o f i g h t back 1 K d i r e c t a c q u i s i t i o n t h r o u g h f o r c e o r c u n n i n g U s a k i n d j i has u s e d b o t h . He has succ e e d e d i n c h a n g i n g t h e f o r m o f W o l v e r i n e Man t o a s m a l l e r v e r s i o n U s a k i n d j i , i s t h e v i c t i m i z e d h e r o as he s u f f e r s f r o m t h e a c t i o n o f t h e v i l l a i n i n t h e c o m p l i c a t i o n . The h e r o i s a l s o t h e p e r s o n who senses some k i n d o f l a c k . In..the i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n U s a k i n d j i senses t h a t s o m e t h i n g i s wrong, o r i t c o u l d be i n t e r p r e t e d as s o m e t h i n g m i s s i n g . However, t h e t h r e a t o f C a n n i b a l i s m . i s s t r o n g e r , t h e r e f o r e , u s e d i n s t e a d o f a f u n c t i o n f o r a l a c k , ..  P r o p p s t a t e s t h a t t h e i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n always c o n t a i n s t h e f a m i l y o f e i t h e r t h e h e r o o r t h e v i l l a i n . The f a m i l y s i t u a t i o n i n t h i s myth i s 36 centered around the. v i l l a i n , rather than around the hero, and i s found towards the end of the myth rather than i n the i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n . Although.function C, consent to counteraction, seems appropriate i n t h i s myth, Propp states that i t i s not found i n t a l e s with a v i c t i m i z e d hero. . Propp sees a v i c t i m i z e d hero as unable to demonstrate any v o l i t i o n a l d e c i s i o n . . Even though the diffe r e n c e between a v i c t i m i z e d hero and a seeker hero i s sometimes dubious i n these twenty myths, and the v i c t i m i z e d hero sometimes does seem able to make a f r e e d e c i s i o n , we w i l l apply Propp's r u l e , and exclude C whenever we have a myth with a v i c t i m i z e d hero.. A f i n e d i s t i n c t i o n , can be seen i n t h i s case, however, Usakindji does not embark on a journey, but merely an adventure. The choice of function B, mediation used i n t h i s case presents a C o n f l i c t because B 1-4 i s applicable t o hero seekers while B 5r7 i s a p p l i - cable to v i c t i m i z e d heroes, as the function that comes closest to describing t h i s action i s B 3« There Is no return of the hero i n t h i s myth j u s t as there i s no departure. A DEF. sequence or any part of i t i s absent; The story ends at the.peak of the narrative., which leads one to consider that, t h i s i s a shortened version of a longer myth. Despite the f a c t that the next myth car r i e s on with. Usakindji's adventures, i t does not mean to say that t h i s myth i s by any means complete. Tran s f i g u r a t i o n does not really, occur as t h i s function r e f e r s to the hero.. Therefore, we might look at t h i s action i n terms of another function,, such as.punishment of the v i l l a i n , or as the l i q u i d a t i o n of the i n i t i a l misfortune. 37 #4 Usakindji and the Geese and the Fox Move I n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n introduction 1 a° lack of food Usakindji i s hungry 1 B mediation 1 ^ departure of hero i n i t i a t i v e , he decides to seek food and develops a plan to catch fowl Usakindji acquires a large sack, which he f i l l s with moss t o ensure the c u r i o s i t y of the geese and ducks as he walked by 1 K d i r e c t a c q u i s i t i o n through the a p p l i c a t i o n of cunning Usakindji f o o l s the geese and catches them f o r his food connectives •to- ut a abundance of food, and lack of food d e s c r i p t i o n of how Usakindji prepares them Fox appears, and sees that Usakindji has much food, and he none I I d e c e i t f u l persuasions of the v i l l a i n the Fox convinces Usakindji that he i s lame I I @?~ hero reacts to the persuasion of the v i l l a i n U sakindji believes him I I H 2 a competition II I v i c t o r y f o r the Fox II return of the hero I I U punishment of the v i l l a i n Usakindji and the Fox race t o the end of the lake Usakindji loses the race because the fox outwitted him Usakindji limped back to f i n d the geese gone Usakindji pursues the Fox with f i r e Fox escapes, although h i s f u r i s singed. 38 .. Usakindji i s the victimized hero i n t h i s myth simply because he i s . d e f i n i t e l y not a seeker hero. He i s on a continuing journey, and en- counters numerous adventures en route. Therefore, there i s no C function' present either.. Although we f i n d no donor, there i s an implication that the acquisi- t i o n of the b i g pack could have been given him by a donor i n order that he could capture.his food, the geese. However, no d e t a i l , i s mentioned. Function a5~ i s used to depict Usakindji's abundance of food i n relation.to Fox's lack, of food. This function i s employed because i t best describes the s i t u a t i o n i n r e l a t i o n to/the rest of the narrative as w e l l as retia r i Usakindji as the hero. In other words, the means by which functions are f u l f i l l e d influence one another, arid i d e n t i c a l forms adapt themselves to different., functions (Propp, 1968:70). As Propp notes, the actions of the dramatis personae as defined from r e l a t i v e to the meaning f o r the hero and fo r the. course of the action are more important than considering any function independently. I t i s d i f f i c u l t to determine whether or not we have one or two moves;,. or one or two t a l e s . According to Propp, i f the hero acquires the object of his.quest through battle or cunning, we have an H function, but i f the hero acquires an agent for the purpose of further searching as the res u l t of an unfriendly encounter, we have a D function. Based on t h i s premise,,., the myth as been divided into two moves because although DEF sequence does occur.,, with the. geese arid ducks seen.as unwilling donors, the K function i s the climax and end of the f i r s t move, rather than DEF preparing f o r the Fox's entry.into the t a l e . Although Usakindji's gain of geese and ducks i s pre- c i s e l y the.reason f o r the fox's d e c e i t f u l persuasions, t h i s i s a l i n e a r con- tinuation of the myth. There i s no mention of Usakindji wanting to obtain 39 the fowl f o r the purpose of further searching. However, the implication could be that Usakindji cannot continue his journey unless he has food, but on.the other hand, he manages to obtain the object of his quest through cunning with no apparent throught to another journey. At t h i s point there i s no new v i l l a n y or lack as f a r as Usakindji i s concerned.;. His gain i n i t i a t e s Fox's interest i n him. Based on the given information^, the over- abundance of food that Usakindji i s l e f t with arid the lack of food that fox has i s .taken to an a5~, thus creating a new move. Another version of the same myth would more.than l i k e l y change the analysis somewhat, and d e f i n i t e l y have, a direct bearing on whether i t i s a single t a l e with two moves,,, or a two move t a l e , or even two separate t a l e s . For instance j i n this.version of the narrative, the second move i s less intertwined with.the f i r s t than inmost s t o r i e s , arid i n fact i t i s possible that t h i s should be a separate story altogether, and be viewed as another adventure that Usakindji exper- iences as he t r a v e l s . introduction Usakindji i s . hungry He meets a bear , The bear agrees to keep him company Usakindji k i l l s and eats the bear 1 K""" direct acquisition through the Usakindji t r i c k s the bear and application of cunning al l e v i a t e s his lack of food #5 How the Animals Got Their Fat Move 1 °^ i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n 1 a 6 lack of food 2 1 D greeting, interrogation o 1 E positive reaction 7 1 F 1 the agent i s eaten 40 Move I I o; i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n and connective 15 I I A imprisonment, and detention 5 plundering I I connectives I I release I I T departure I I H 2 hero struggles with v i l l a i n Usakindji leaves the food he i s eating and goes to the t o i l e t Usakindji becomes trapped by a tree and the birds devour the rest of the bear meat Usakindji t e l l s the tree that some- day i t w i l l be used by people Usakindji i s freed by the tree' after the birds f i n i s h eating Usakindji prepares the hot bear f a t to take with him Usakindji and Muskrat argue, and c a l l each other names I I I 2 v i c t o r y over v i l l a i n Usakindji wins the argument I I K acquisition through force Muskrat i s forced to cool the f a t , but he s p i l l s i t while t r y i n g to cool i t I I other forms of material gain at the denousment Although Usakindji loses his fat., a l l the animals receive some This-story i s again another of Usakindji's adventures as he proceeds along his journey. Therefore, he i s more a victimized hero than a seeker hero... The DEE sequence i s . more obvious i n t h i s story, although the hero i s not tested or.interrogated in. any way. Conversely, i t i s the hero that greets the donor. According to Propp, the donor usually approaches the hero.. However, Propp also mentions that a sudden independent appearance of a magical agent or 41 helper are most often encountered without the s l i g h t e s t preparation, which are rudimentary forms of t h i s f u n c t i o n . The sentence " I ' l l feed you now and. you feed me i n the winter" s i g n i f i e s that the hero plans on obtaining the bear's f l e s h f o r food f o r the coming winter. Move one ends rather abruptly and move I I begins and i s a continua- t i o n of_move one. This i s obviously one tale,. and the applicable functions divide the story i n t o two moves. Propp observes that an element which i s u s u a l l y encountered.under one heading, bear and v i l l a i n , and i s suddenly met under another ; !donor i s c a l l e d a t r a n s p o s i t i o n of forms. Transpositions of t h i s sort, ; he state s , play a great .role i n the creation of t a l e formations. Sometimes they are taken f o r a new theme, although they are derived from o l d ones as the result, of. a c e r t a i n transformation. This i s another reason why i t i s important that.the. characters.be defined according to t h e i r meaning to the hero and the course of the action of the myth. I f the r u l e was not followed closely,., transpositions.would not be determined with any accuracy. Although Usakindji does not acquire some material reward at the end of. the.myth, he tr a n s f e r s the f a t to the animals i n the myth,. In t h i s way function W i s tr a n s f e r r e d to the other dramatis personae brought i n t o the stor y . 42 #6 The Woman Who Married the Bear Move i y i n i t i a l . s i t u a t i o n i n t e r d i c t i o n 1 6" i n t e r d i c t i o n v i o l a t e d i ntroduction women suggest that she return home with them she decides to stay and pick b e r r i e s 1 n d e c e i t f u l persuasions of v i l l a i n a Bear persuades the woman to go with him 1 Q- hero reacts to the persuasions of the v i l l a i n she agrees to accompany him 1 A kidnapping the Bear takes her f a r away 1 B announcement i n various forms the g i r l s brother dreams of h i s s i s t e r , her parents are upset 1 C consent to counter-action the woman's brother decides to search f o r his s i s t e r 1 ^ departure of hero from home an i m p l i c a t i o n that the brother leaves home 1 H f i g h t i n an open f i e l d the brother entices the bear out of his den 1 I"*" v i c t o r y i n open f i e l d he k i l l s the bear 1 K a c q u i s i t i o n achieved with help of an enticement or decoys I I a lack of i n d i v i d u a l The woman's brother throws a bear hide over the entrance to l u r e the bear out, and his s i s t e r follows her husband woman loses husband 43 Move 3 I I D request f o r favour a f t e r death 2 I I E f r i e n d l y response 1 return home of the hero I § connectives II F agent not tra n s f e r r e d I I U punishment Woman's husband requests that she never remarry she agrees the woman returns home with her brother d e s c r i p t i o n of woman's l i f e a f t e r her return home the woman f a i l s to keep her promise to her dead husband. the woman and her new husband are k i l l e d by bears The hero i n t h i s .tale i s the woman's brother.;. He decides t o l i q u i d a t e the lack of ah other, per son, and since he has a search as his goal,, he i s a seeker hero. As Propp notes, i f two persons leave home, one i n search of another,, the route followed by the story and on which the action i s developed, i s the route of the seeker. The myth does not r e a l l y seem w e l l defined i n terms of two separate moves, as the.second move e s p e c i a l l y i s poorly: developed. However, they have been treated as two. moves since there seem to be two d i f f e r e n t themes,, one embedded.in a la r g e r one. The emphasis on the need f o r a husband i s brought out here. _Although the brother i s the hero i n move 1, there i s no mention of him in.move I I , His s i s t e r becomes the hero i n t h i s move, Usually the hero remains the-same i f there are two moves, and perhaps i f t h i s second move :was more complete, and the dramatis personae might also be more complete, and t i e 44 in-with. t h e i r appropriate functions. I t i s also i n t e r e s t i n g to note that t h i s myth begins with the woman already involved i n gathering berries. Had the story begun with the members of the younger generation absenting themselves from home,.we would have had a B 3 morpholopical element as w e l l as the others we have. #3 Usakindji arid Moon Man Move i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n introduction I S reconnaissance by the hero to obtain information about the v i l l a i n Usakindji follows the tracks to f i n d out who they belong to 1 £ hero receives information about the v i l l a i n Usakindji discovers Moon Man who has big feet and no teeth 1 n d e c e i t f u l persuasions by the v i l l a i n Moon Man persuades Usakindji to stay at his camp 1 Q hero e i g ves i n 17 1 A threat of cannabalism 1 B mediation 1 D f i r s t function of dbnar ) 1 E reaction of hero Usakindji agrees to camp with Moon Man Usakindji r e a l i z e s something i s wrong when he sees Moon Man eye his moccassins Usakindji anticipates Moon Man's plan and acts accordingly Usakindji i s his own donor and decides to outwit Moon Man 1 KF direct acquisition through the application of cunning instead of throwing Usakindji's moccasins i n the f i r e , Moon Man destroys his own, and threat of cannabalism liquidated. 45 v i l l a i n pardoned Usakindji pardons Moon Man and helps him by g i v i n g him another p a i r of moccasins and a p a i r of teeth leave taking at road Usakindji and Moon Man part ways marker other forms of deception Usakindji has made Moon Man a p a i r of or coercion teeth against his wishes hero gives i n or reacts Moon Man wears the teeth mechanically to deceit of v i l l a i n threat of cannabalism The v i l l a g e people are i n danger as Moon Man has teeth competition Usakindji has Moon Man continue on h i s journey, and pass through the v i l l a g e where he i s to suck people's f i n g e r s v i c t o r y i n contest Moon Man f a i l s t o suck the f i n g e r s , and bi t e s them instead... Usakindji has outwitted Moon Man punishment of v i l l a i n Moon Man i s chased i n t o the sky,, where he stays material gain T.here i s now a moon i n the sky 4 6 Usakindji i s again the v i c t i m i z e d hero by d e f i n i t i o n . The presence of a DEF sequence i s questionable. Although Moon Man would w e l l be. a h o s t i l e donor, i t i s Usakindji that gives Moon Man another p a i r of moccassins and another p a i r of teeth. We have a hero acting as a donor, g i v i n g to the v i l l a i n . However, the hero i s also a s s i s t i n g himself, as his purpose i n g i v i n g Moon Man teeth and another p a i r of moccasins, f o r instance, is..to..instigate his defeat. As Propp notes, "the hero often gets along, without .any helpers... He i s his own helper, as i t were" (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 8 2 ) , and.in some cases takes on the at t r i b u t e s as well as the functions of the helper. .Function U or punishment i s an i n t e r e s t i n g function i n that i t could be applicable to both Move 1 and Move I I . Moon Man i s punished f i n a l l y f o r t r y i n g to deceive Usakindji and also f o r chewing the people's fingers.. Since Moon Man went unpunished i n Move 1 , t h i s move i s completed at the end of Move I I . . . . The HI function, contest and v i c t o r y , at f i r s t seems more l i k e an MN function, a d i f f i c u l t task and i t s s o l u t i o n , However,, i f we consider that f i r s t l y a d i f f i c u l t task i s assigned to the hero, not the v i l l a i n , and secondly, a d i f f i c u l t task does not u s u a l l y include dealing with the v i l l a i n , but with another character or object quite separate from the main dramatis personae and objects. Even though the struggle between Usakindji and Moon Man i s rather vague, and i n d i r e c t , i t i s more a contest of wits than the performance of a d i f f i c u l t task. We have the same function i n both move 1 and 1 1 , that of the threat of cannabalism. We should make the point that t h i s does not mean that these two acts are the same. Functions are defined according to t h e i r consequences, and independently of t h e i r dramatis personae, or the manner i n which they are f u l f i l l e d . (Propp, 1968 : 6 6 ) . k7 #8 Usakindji and Mosquito Man Move I n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n 1 ^ 1 V reconnaissance by the hero to obtain information about the v i l l a i n Introduction Usakindji follows the tracks to f i n d out who they belong to 1 Q d e l i v e r y of information Usakindji discovers they belong to Mosquito Man 1 & lack of food, means of existence Usakindji has no food and no way and a b i l i t y to cook i t to cook i t by f i r e 1 & i n i t i a t i v e Usakindji decides to learn how to cook 1 D f i r s t function of donor Mosquito Man states that he i s going to cook food 1 E p o s i t i v e reaction r 8 1 r agent i s seized Usakindji k i l l s and s t e a l s the bear while Mosquito Man i s away 1 K direct acquisition through cunning Usakindji feasts on the bear connectives II " threat of cannabalism the next day Mosquito Man sees Usakindji and asks him f o r help with his beavers Mosquito Man threatens to k i l l U sakindji and use his skin II hero struggles with v i l l a i n Usakindji t r i c k s Mosquito Man in t o going under the i c e to get his axe I I I k i l l i n g of v i l l a i n without a fight Usakindji k i l l s Mosquito Man by keeping him under the i c e so that he freezes to death 48 M o v e i i K d i r e c t a c q u i s i t i o n t h r o u g h c u n n i n g U s a k i n d j i a c q u i r e s t h e b e a v e r t h r o u g h h i s c u n n i n g a n d l i q u i d a t e s t h e t h r e a t o f v i l l a n y i i u p u n i s h m e n t M o s q u i t o M a n i s c h o p p e d i n t o t i n y p i e c e s c o n n e c t i v e s j t r e b l e s t h r e e e x p l a n a t i o n s ; h o w m o s q u i t o e s w e r e c r e a t e d , w h y t h e r e a r e s o m a n y m o s q u i t o e s i n b e a v e r h o u s e s , a n d w h y t h e m o o s e c a n n o t h e a r a n y o n e c o m i n g U s a k i n d j i i s a g a i n t h e v i c t i m i z e d h e r e o . I n i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e t a l e t h e i m p l i c a t i o n i s m a d e t h a t M o s q u i t o M a n i s o n e o f t h e m a n y m a n e a t i n g m o n s t e r s t h a t U s a k i n d j i k i l l e d , a n d t h i s t a l e t e l l s o f o n e o f h i s m a n y e x p e r i e n c e s w i t h t h e s e m o n s t e r s . P r o p p s t a t e s t h a t t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f f u n c t i o n B l i e s i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e h e r o e s d e p a r t u r e f r o m h o m e i s c a u s e d b y i t . H o w e v e r , i n t h i s t a l e a s i n m a n y o f t h e o t h e r U s a k i n d j i t a l e s , U s a k i n d j i i s a l r e a d y a w a y f r o m h o m e , , a n d h a p p e n s u p o n a s i t u a t i o n . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e r e s t o f t h e p l o t i s b a s e d o n h i s d e c i s i o n a t t h i s p o i n t . F u n c t i o n . U o r p u n i s h m e n t w o u l d a l s o b e i n t e r p r e t e d d i f f e r e n t l y , a s W , o r m a t e r i a l g a i n . R a t h e r t h a n c o n s i d e r i n g m o s q u i t o e s a s a p u n i s h m e n t , t h e y a r e a l s o v i e w e d a s a n a d v a n t a g e t o m a n s i n c e t h e y a s s i s t h i m i n h u n t i n g m o o s e . #9 W h y t h e M o o s e i s W a r y o f M a n M o v e 1 i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n i n t r o d u c t i o n 1 Ol1 l a c k o f h e l p e r t h e b o y l a c k s a t o t e m 49 d i s p a t c h t h e f a t h e r s e n d s h i s s o n i n s e a r c h o f a t o t e m c o n s e n t t o c o u n t e r - a c t i o n t h e s o n . i g o e s i n s e a r c h o f a t o t e m d e p a r t u r e o f h e r o t h e b o y l e a v e s h o m e , r o u t e o f h e r o f i r s t f u n c t i o n o f t h e d o n o r t h e b o y m e e t s m o o s e a n d l i v e s w i t h t h e m p o s i t i v e r e a c t i o n b o y i s w i t h t h e m o o s e a l o n g t i m e t h e o b j e c t o f t h e s e a r c h i s t r a n s f e r r e d t h e b o y l e a r n s t h e w a y s o f t h e m o o s e r e t u r n o f t h e h e r o t h e b o y r e t u r n s t o h i s p a r e n t s l a c k o f g a m e ( f o o d ) B o y M o o s e a n d h i s b r o t h e r a r e h u n t i n g d e p a r t u r e o f h e r o t h e b o y r u n s a w a y f r o m h i s b r o t h e r w i t h t h e m o o s e a t t e m p t t o d e s t r o y h e r o B o y M o o s e ' s b r o t h e r n e a r l y k i l l s h i m t r a n s f o r m a t i o n f r o m a n i m a l t o b o y B o y M o o s e c h a n g e s i n t o a b o y s o t h a t h i s b r o t h e r c a n r e c o g n i z e h i m r e c o g n i t i o n o f h e r o h i s b r o t h e r r e c o g n i z e s h i m l e a v e t a k i n g t h e y p a r t w a y s . T h e b o y r e t u r n s t o t h e M o o s e a n d t h e b r o t h e r r e t u r n s h o m e l a c k o f g a m e B o y M o o s e ' s b r o t h e r i s h u n t i n g , t h e r e f o r e , a l a c k o f g a m e i s i n s i n u a t e d 50 r e c o g n i t i o n o f h e r o B o y M o o s e ' s b r o t h e r f i n d s h i m a s l e e p c o n n e c t i v e s d i a l o g u e b e t w e e n M o o s e B o y a n d h i s b r o t h e r n e w p h y s i c a l a p p e a r a n c e t h e b o y c h a n g e s i n t o a m o o s e f o r e v e r l e a v e t a k i n g M o o s e B o y a n d h i s b r o t h e r p a r t w a y s f o r e v e r T h e h e r o i n t h i s t a l e i s B o y M o o s e . B e c a u s e h e i s s e n t o u t o n a q u e s t h e i s a s e e k e r h e r o . W e f i n d t h e s e e k e r h e r o i n t h i s s t o r y a s P r o p p s u g g e s t s . , h e s h o u l d b e f o u n d , w i t h h i s f a m i l y i n t h e i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n . T h e A B C c o m p l i c a t i o n s e e m s t o r u n t o g e t h e r i n t h i s s t o r y , , a n d t h e r e s e e m s t o b e i n s u f f i c i e n t f a c t s t o m e r i t a l l t h e s e f u n t i o n s , w h e r e a s i n o t h e r i n s t a n c e s w e f i n d t h a t t h e r e s e e m t o b e s u f f i c i e n t f u n c t i o n s t o c o p e w i t h a l l t h e f a c t s . H o w e v e r t h e a b o v e c o m p l i c a t i o n i s a c o m p l e t e ' r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e b r i e f f a c t s g i v e n . I n m o v e s I I a n d I I I t h e l a c k i s m o r e i m p l i e d t h a n i t i s s t a t e d , a n d t h e b o d y o f t h e t w o m o v e s a r e r a t h e r i n c o m p l e t e , a n d b o t h a r e l a c k i n g a K f u n c t i o n . I t i s a l s o i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t e a c h s u c c e s s i v e m o v e i s l e s s c o m p l e t e . T h e D E F s e q u e n c e i s a l s o p o o r l y o u t l i n e d , , a l t h o u g h t h e c o r e o f t h e f u n c t i o n s a r e p r e s e n t i n t h i s m o v e o f t h e m y t h . T h e r e i s c e r t a i n l y a m p l e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r e l a b o r a t i o n o n t h e f u n c t i o n o f t h e d o n o r , a n d t h e r e c e i p t o f a m a g i c a l a g e n t , h e l p e r , t o t e m . I t i s a l s o i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t t h e f u n c t i o n s , d e p a r t u r e a n d r e t u r n o f t h e h e r o , f o r m a p a i r . T h e h e r o u s u a l l y r e t u r n s t h e s a m e w a y h e d e p a r t e d . H o w - e v e r , i n t h i s m y t h , t h e M o o s e B o y d o e s n o t r e t u r n t o h i s p e o p l e , b u t r e m a i n s w h e r e h e i s . M o v e III a i n § i n 1 1 i n < 51 #10 Usakindji, Bear and Chicadee Move 1 i n i t i a l s i t u a t i o n introduction i £ reconnaissance Usakindji wonders where a l l the t r a i l s lead 1 £~ the hero receives information about the v i l l a i n U sakindji discovers that the t r a i l s are bear t r a i l s , and that the bears eat dr i e d b e r r i e s 1 Tj d e c e i t f u l persuasions of the v i l l a i n The Bear persuades Usakindji to search f o r ber r i e s f o r him Q the hero reacts to the persuasions of the v i l l a i n U sakindji believes the Bear, and the Bear then escapes from him OL lack of food Usakindji i s l e f t without food 6 c a l l f o r help Usakindji asks f o r help from the Chicadee 10 1 0 the o f f e r of a magical agent as an exchange Usakindji o f f e r s the Chicadee a c o l l a r that w i l l keep him warm i E f r i e n d l y response the Chicadee agrees to help f i n d the Bear r 2- 1 f the object of the search i s pointed out The Chicadee points to the Bear's hiding place 1 § connectives i w1 1 I 1 1 K hero struggles with' v i l l a i n the k i l l i n g of the v i l l a i n without a f i g h t d i r e c t a c q u i s i t i o n through cunning dialogue between the Bear and Usakindji The bear t r i e s to outwit Usakindji Usakindji k i l l s the Bear as he emerges from h i s hiding place Usakindji f o o l s the Bear and captures him f o r h i s food 52 Usakindji i s the v i c t i m i z e d hero by d e f i n i t i o n ; He encounters ad- ventures while t r a v e l l i n g rather than leaving hom i n search of someone. Although t h i s story i s lengthy i n comparison with some of the others., i t appears more s t r a i g h t foreward and complete than most of the other Beaver myths. The Ghicadee i s a true type I I donor i n t h i s t a l e , Propp states that a sudden independent appearance of a magical agent or helper are most often encountered without the s l i g h t e s t preparation (Propp, 1968:46) , . A c t u a l l y Chicadee i s more a helper than a donor, because he only a s s i s t s Usakindji. i n f i n d i n g the Bear, he does not. give Usakindji an agent. However, Propp notes that l i v i n g things, objects and q u a n t i t i e s are founded.upon the functions of the dramatis personae and must be viewed as equivalent quantities.. Function B mediation, i s used s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t l y i n t h i s t a l e than i n , f o r instance, t a l e #6. In the l a t t e r , t a l e B funtion introduces the hero, whereas i n t h i s t a l e the hero i s well i n t o the tale*. Both B functions i n each t a l e announce the misfortune, but both i n d i f f e r e n t ways* In t a l e #6, the misfortuen i s made known to the hero i n the form of a dream which a f f e c t s his departure from home; i n t h i s t a l e , the hero announces his dilemma to the environ- ment at hand, which r e s u l t s i n the helper appearing on the scene. We notice that the t a l e has a long prepatory section, and a f a i r l y comprehensive f i r s t h a l f , using most of the functions. Howeverj a f t e r the climax of the story i s reached, the t a l e ends very r a p i d l y , as do a l l the other Beaver t a l e s . 53 II 2 . i i ) PROPP'S RESULTS - BEAVER MYTHS I f we r e f e r to table 1 we can more e a s i l y see the me t a l i n q u i s t i c s t r i n g s that Propp's an a l y s i s , as applied.to the Beaver myths, discloses,, vie can e a s i l y see that a l l Beaver t a l e s employ at l e a s t one morpholopical element i n t h e i r prepatbry sections. The function i s always used tf, i n d i c a t e the beginning of the myth, but we also f i n d that s i x Beaver t a l e s employ other prepatory functions, as w e l l . For example, each prepatory .function i s used at l e a s t once i n a l l the ten t a l e s , except the preliminary misfortune caused by a d e c e i t f u l agreement. Propp's p a i r s , i n t e r d i c t i o n and i t s v i o l a t i o n , reconnaissance by one of the dramatis personae and the re c e i p t of information, and d e c e i t f u l per- suasions by one of the dramatis personae and submission to such, f i r s t l y , always go.together, and secondly, i f one p a i r i s used, the use of a second p a i r i s us u a l l y unnecessary. Propp f u r t h e r states that i f several pairs are used., one can.always expect a double morphological meaning. (Propp, 1 9 6 8 : 1 0 9 ) . The accuracy of t h i s statement i s exemplified by t a l e # 7 . However, several p a i r s are not used i n the same move, nor are the same p a i r used twice i n the same move. We do f i n d , only once, and i n t a l e # 7 , that, the same p a i r i s used twice i n one t a l e , but each time i n a separate move,, fu r t h e r demonstrating that these prepatory functions operate i n the same mutually exclusive manner as do the main functions. In the Beaver t a l e s we do not f i n d that the absentation of e i t h e r e l - ders or youngers. We do f i n d the i n t e n s i f i e d form of t h i s function, death of parent (s) i n t a l e #2. We f i n d an i n t e n s i f i e d form of i n t e r d i c t i o n and i t s v i o l a t i o n i n . t h i s t a l e as w e l l . This p a i r does not appear i n any of the other t a l e s . Reconnaissance by the hero and r e c e i p t of information by the hero i s 54 employed three times, each i n d i f f e r e n t myths. Furthermore, i t i s always reconnaissance by the hero and r e c e i p t of information by him that makes t h i s function as t i g h t as i t i s . The function tj, t r i c k e r y , i s found seven times i n the Beaver t a l e s , with function 8,, complicity, also found an equal number of times. However, 7 ) 1 , d e c e i t f u l persuasions by the v i l l a i n appears s i x out of seven times, and ) j 3 « other forms of deception, occurs only once, with ^2 not appearing at a l l . The counterpart to 7}1 i s found only three times, while 93 i s employed more appropriately i n the remaining cases. The p a i r to 7J.2 i s not used. One of the reasons.for the looseness i n the l a s t p a i r of functions i s found i n i t s d e f i n i t i o n . In other words, Yjl, £\2, tj3 are not as accurately matched to Q l , Q2, 03, r e s p e c t i v e l y as are the other two pa i r s of functions. T r i c k e r y and complicity seem to be the most important function i n the prepatory s e c t i o n . I t w i l l be i n t e r e s t i n g to note whether or not t h i s observation i s upheld throughout the r e s t of the a n a l y s i s . We.found that function A, v i l l a n y , occurred ten d i f f e r e n t times i n the ten myths.. Furthermore, of the twenty-five A functions, only s i x were u t i l i z e d . . In other words, the majority of these functions were not applicable to the a c t i o n . i n the Beaver t a l e s . One of the functions, however, was used several times. For example, A 1 7 , the threat of cannibalism, was found f i v e times i n the myths (Usakindji was the hero threatened i n four out of f i v e cases), while A l , the kidnapping of a person.was found twice. Functions A5, plundering, A8, demand f o r d e l i v e r y , A 1 5 t imprisonment, and A19, d e c l a r a t i o n of war, were each found only once. The functions that are absent from the Beaver myths seem to support each other. For example, anything r e l a t e d to magic i s missing, thus we f i n d that functions A2, seizure of a magical agent, A i i , f o r c i b l e seizure of such, A 7 , evocation of disappearance, A l l , casting of a s p e l l , and A18, vampirism are absent. We also f i n d very l i t t l e s a i d d i r e c t l y of marriage, therefore, no 55 n o t a l e r e v o l v e s a r o u n d t h e t o p i c , a n d a c c o r d i n g l y w e d o n o t f i n d a v i l l a n y s u c h a s A v i i , A l 6 , o r A x v i . P r o p p s t a t e s t h a t t h e r e a r e s o m e f u n c t i o n s t h a t r a r e l y o c c u r i n d e - p e n d e n t l y , s u c h a s A l l , t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , a n d A12 f a l s e s u b s t i t u t i o n . A l t h o u g h t h e s e f u n c t i o n s d o n o t o c c u r c o n c o m i t a n t l y w i t h a n o t h e r f u n c t i o n i n t h e B e a v e r m y t h s , w e f i n d f u c t i o n s A5 , p l u n d e r i n g a n d A15 i m p r i s o n m e n t , o c c u r r i n g c o n c o m i t a n t l y o n c e i n t a l e #5. A s f a r a s f u n c t i o n a , . l a c k o r i n s u f f i c i e n c y , i s c o n c e r n e d , w e f i n d t h a t s i x o f t h e n i n e . f o u n d i n t h e B e a v e r , m y t h s f a l l i n t o t h e c a t e g o r y o f o t h e r f o r m s . I n t e r e s t i n g l y e n o u g h , . a l l s i x c o n c e r n a l a c k o f f o o d . A l s o a5 m e n t i o n s a l a c k o f f o o d , . b u t i n a d d i t i o n , i t i s c o n c e r n e d , w i t h h o w t o p r e p a r e t h e f o o d . T h e o t h e r t w o f u n c t i o n s d e a l w i t h a l a c k o f a n i n d i v i d u a l , o n e a h u s b a n d , t h e o t h e r a h e l p e r , T h e h e l p e r i n t h i s c a s e i s n o t t h o u g h t o f a s b e i n g m a g i c a l i n t h a t i t i s a b o v e a n d b e y o n d e v e r y d a y o c c u r r e n c e s , r a t h e r i t i s a p a r t o f a y o u n g I n d i a n ' s l i f e . F u n c t i o n s a3 , l a c k o f w o n d r o u s o b j e c t s , a n d A J + , t h e e g g o f d e a t h ( o r l o v e ) , a r e n o t p r e s e n t i n t h e B e a v e r m y t h s . B o t h a r e m u c h m o r e s p e c i - f i c t h a n t h e o t h e r f o u r f u n c t i o n s . B f u n c t i o n , t h e c o n n e c t i v e i n c i d e n t , o r m e d i a t i o n i s f o u n d i n a l l t e n . m y t h s . . A c c o r d i n g t o P r o p p , t h i s . f u n c t i o n d o e s a n u m b e r o f t h i n g s , f o r e x a m p l e ; i t m a k e s k n o w n t h e . m i s f o r t u n e o r l a c k , t h e h e r o i s a p p r o a c h e d , a n d a l l o w e d t o d e p a r t o r i s d i s p a t c h e d , i t b r i n g s t h e h e r o i n t o t h e t a l e , a n d l a s t l y , . t h e _ h e r o ' s d e p a r t u r e f r o m h o m e i s c a u s e d b y t h e a c t i o n a t t h i s p o i n t i n t h e s t o r y . . O b v i o u s l y n o t a l l t h e s e f u n c t i o n s c a n o c c u r s i m u l t a n e o u s l y . F o r e x a m p l e , _ a l t h o u g h e a c h . B . f u n c t i o n a l w a y s i n v o l v e s t h e h e r o , i t d o e s n o t n e c e s - s a r i l y , i n t r o d u c e h i m i n t o t h e s t o r y . I n n i n e o u t o f t e n t i m e s t h e h e r o i s a l r e a d y i n v o l v e d i n t h e t a l e . O n l y o n c e d o e s B4F a n n o u n c e m e n t o f m i s f o r t u n e i n v a r i o u s f o r m s , b r i n g t h e h e r o i n t o t h e t a l e . A c c o r d i n g t o P r o p p , B l t o B4 56 are used i n t a l e s with a seeker hero, while P/" to B1 are used i n t a l e s with a v i c t i m i z e d hero. However, in,the Beaver myths we f i n d that, i n myths #5 and 10 functions B^, release, and B 1* c a l l f o r help, are used r e s p e c t i v e l y with the v i c t i m i z e d heroes. Thus t h i s does, not follow Propp's r u l e . A l l tasks or actions showing i n i t i a t i v e have.been interpreted in. terms of B, mainly f o r lack of a more appropriate fun c t i o n . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that i n £©ur of the Usakindji t a l e s we have employed a general B function, and the other two have been used i n c o r r e c t l y according t o Propp's r u l e . The other four t a l e s , #1, 2, 6 and 9, which are not Usakindji t a l e s , employ the B function, according to Propp's r u l e . A l l mediating functions have been u t i l i z e d except two, B^, hero released, and B', a lament. F i n a l l y , we should point out that each myth contains only one mediating f u n c t i o n . We do not have two moves i n one t a l e , each with a B fun c t i o n . The B function always occurs i n the more complete of the two moves i n each t a l e c o n s i s t i n g of more than one move. C function, consent to counteraction, i s used with the seeker hero only, and according to Propp's r u l e should then be found i n t a l e s #1, 6 and 9, which accurately they are. As Propp observes, although the hero does not always request permission to go on a search, as i s the case with these myths, a v o l i t i o n a l d e c i s i o n precedes the search. Because consent to counteraction i s found i n con- junction with a seeker hero, the d i f f e r e n c e between the v i c t i m hero and the seeker hero becomes rather important i n these t a l e s . Usakindji could e a s i l y be a seeker hero.in t a l e s 7 and 8, as i n these two t a l e s he makes a de c i s i o n to track someone. However,.his de c i s i o n to track Moon Man and Mosquito Man occur i n the prepatory section of both myths, and the morphological element, reconnaissance, i s employed i n both instances. Therefore, the Usakindji t a l e s are a l l defined i n terms of v i c t i m i z e d hero myths. We would have a very, d i f f e r e n t r e s u l t i f Usakindji was considered a seeker hero. However, Usakindji i s a v i c t i m i z e d hero 57 because something happens to him enroute, and he merely accommodates the acti o n . Due to t h i s d i f f e r e n c e i n p o s i t i o n i n g , C function i s found only three times i n the Beaver t a l e s . Function ^ , departure, represents dispatch of the hero, and shows his route regardless of whether.or not he i s a seeker or v i c t i m i z e d hero, and i s found tent-times i n seven myths. In two of the seeker t a l e s , departure i s employed three times i n t a l e #1 and twice i n t a l e #9. In both these t a l e s departure i n d i c a t e s another aspect of the myth, but since a new lack or v i l l a n y was not introduced, a new move was not created. Instead they both continue actions based on the i n i t i a l v i l l a n y . This function i s also used i n three of the Usakindji t a l e s #3, 4, and 5 f o r lack of a better funcion. In a l l three t a l e s , the motif depicts Usakindji's d e c i s i o n to trap the v i l l a i n , and h i s sub- sequent preparation. C, consent to counteraction, and ^ are found together i n t a l e s #1, 6 and 9 only. I n t e r e s t i n g l y enough, these are the only t a l e s that are hero seeker t a l e s . The f u n c t i o n s T i s also employed whether or not s p a t i a l transference takes place. In terms of T functio n , only t a l e #2 i n d i c a t e s a unique a c t i o n . (In t h i s case Wabshu i s a banished hero, transported by his f a t h e r ) . Usually t h i s s p a t i a l transference i n which the hero i s tr a n s f e r r e d , delivered or l ed to the whereabouts of the object of search i s defined i n terms of G functio n , which i s also considered as a n a t u r a l continuation of T . We f i n d function G only twice i n the Beaver myths. In t a l e #1 we f i n d that Old Man Owl i s l e d to h i s daughter, and i n t a l e #3 we see that the hero i s c a r r i e d . The other four morphological elements of t h i s function are not u t i l i z e d . Therefore, unless the object of a search l i e s e i t h e r v e r t i c a l l y or h o r i z o n t a l l y f a r away, departure i s u t i l i z e d as opposed to the function f o r s p a t i a l t r a n s - f e r e n c e . As f a r as the ABC complication i s concerned, t h i s complete sequence i s found i n three t a l e s ; #1, 6 and 9» These three t a l e s , we might note, are 58 the only seeker hero t a l e s . i n the Beaver Corpora. The v i c t i m i z e d hero t a l e s , according to Propp would not carry C fun c t i o n . Of these t a l e s the sequence AB^ i s found i n three t a l e s out of.seven, AB is.found four times; AT i s not found at a l l , nor i s BT . A function alone i s found s i x times out of a t o t a l of seventeen p o s s i b i l i t i e s . Thus i t seems that t h i s ABC^ sequence or the ABT was completed as often as we might assume. Thus f a r the seeker t a l e s seem to be more complete according to Proppian a n a l y s i s . We f i n d that D function, or the f i r s t function of the donor appears ten times i n the Beaver myths, twice i n myths #1 and 2, once i n the other t a l e s except #3 and 4, where i t does not appear a t . a l l . Of the f i f t e e n a v a i l a b l e functions, we have u t i l i z e d only s i x . Although we have fourteen motifs besides function D from which t o choose, Function D i s employed three times f o r lack of an appropriate function i n r e l a t i o n to the Beaver myths. Both forms of D' are also-general forms of t h i s f u n c t i o n . „ . Propp states, that.the donor i s u s u a l l y encountered a c c i d e n t a l l y . However, t h i s does not hold true i n the Beaver t a l e s , except f o r t a l e #10, and perhaps #5, where Usakindji meets a bear. In t a l e #2, Nahata appears, not accidently, but d e l i b e r a t e l y . In t a l e #9, Boy Moose may have come across h i s totem a c c i d e n t a l l y , but we are given no i n d i c a t i o n of t h i s i n the myth. In other t a l e s , the donor i s already involved i n the action of the t a l e . Further- more, i n none of the t a l e s does the donor give the hero a magical object which permits the l i q u i d a t i o n of.the misfortune. We f i n d that the donor i n most of the t a l e s supplies the hero with information. Even i n t a l e #10, the donor supplies the. hero, with information i n exchange f o r a c o l l a r . Propp.notes that eoften the.hero copes without any helpers, and becomes his; own helper. In these circumstances, the hero takes on the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the donor. For example, one of the at t r i b u t e s of a helper 59 i s h i s prophetic wisdom. When a helper i s absent from the t a l e , t h i s quality- i s t r a n s f e r r e d t o the hero, with the r e s u l t being a prophetic hero. We come close to t h i s idea i n t a l e #6, move 1, when the g i r l ' s brother dreams of h i s s i s t e r ' s whereabouts. However, i n the Beaver t a l e s , the donor i s u s u a l l y separate from e i t h e r the hero or the v i l l a i n except i n t a l e s #5 and #8, where the v i l l a i n i s also a donor, and i n t a l e #7 where the hero i s his own donor. Propp also points out that converse of the above idea, where a helper may perform those functions whicM. are s p e c i f i c f o r the hero. This occurs i n t a l e #1. L i t t l e Owl and Owl Boy search f o r Old Man Owl's daughter, but"do not fi n d ' h e r . When the hero, Old Man Owl searches f o r h i s daughter, he finds her. The r e a c t i o n of the hero, or E function, also occurs ten times i n the Beaver myths, but we employ only four of the twelve a v a i l a b l e motifs. We f i n d that a D function does not always have a corresponding E function, or p o s i t i v e or negative r e a c t i o n of the hero. For example, i n t a l e s #1, 6 and 10 t h i s discrepancy i s exhibited only once by each, while i n the other seven t a l e s the hero reacts according to the actions of the donor. Function F, the pr o v i s i o n or r e c e i p t of a magical agent or helper, occurs only six: times i n the^Beaver myths, and four of the sixteen available functions are u t i l i z e d . F 2 or the function i n which the agent i s pointed out i s employed twice, once i n t a l e #2 and once in.#10.. Both these t a l e s i n t e r - e s t i n g l y enough, have productive donors. F~i the agent i s not tr a n s f e r r e d , i s also u t i l i z e d twice i n these myths, once i n t a l e #2 and i n t a l e #6. In both instances, the request f o r a favour a f t e r death i s not f u l f i l l e d , although the circumstances are d i f f e r e n t . 7 8 Functions F , the agent i s drunk or eaten, and F , the agent i s seized, are employed once each i n the myths. Although both these functions 60 the hero k i l l i n g and eating a bear, i n t a l e #8, Usakindji s t e a l s the bear from the v i l l a i n . The other four F functions are f u l f i l l e d by function K, which w i l l be discussed along with function K, therefore, each DEF sequence" i s completed. DEF i s an i n t e r e s t i n g sequence and i s c a l l e d a sphere of action of the donor. This sometimes occurs as what Propp r e f e r s to as an inverted sequence, where these three functions occur before the v i l l a n y . Propp states that the usual t a l e presents a misfortune at f i r s t and then the re c e i p t of a helper who l i q u i d a t e d i t , whereas an inverted sequence gives the r e c e i p t of a helper at f i r s t and then the misfortune which i s l i q u i d a t e d by him. In t a l e #2, we have a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t example. A request f o r a favour a f t e r death i s made, but i s not f u l f i l l e d , which forms the basis of the myth. When we consider the DEF functions together, a large v a r i e t y of combinations..become apparent. Propp distinguishes between two types; Type 1 exhibits u n f r i e n d l y or deceived donors "who u n w i l l i n g l y f u r n i s h the hero with something" (Propp, 1968:48). Type I I exhibits f r i e n d l y donors with the ex- ception of those who surrender a magical agent u n w i l l i n g l y or a f t e r a f i g h t . In the Beaver t a l e s we f i n d f i v e type two sequences and one type one sequence i n t a l e #8. Moreover, t a l e s #3 and #7 might have also been type one sequences had they been more complete. We see that function H, struggle, and aits- counterpart, I, defeat of v i l l a i n , are found nine times i n nine myths. The f i r s t two motifs, f i g h t i n an open f i e l d , and a competition are used e x c l u s i v e l y , with H"*" found three times and H s i x times. A .general function H was not necessary here, as the two motifs were general enough to include a l l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s encountered i n the myths. Functions Y?> a game of cards, and H\ weighing, were not 6l a p p r o p r i a t e i n t h e s e s t o r i e s . W e f i n d t h a t f u n c t i o n s I " * " ^ i n c l u s i v e s e q u e n t i a l l y c o r r e s p o n d t o f u n c t i o n s H " * " ^ i n c l u s i v e . B e s i d e s t h i s , w e h a v e t w o m o r e I f u n c t i o n s f r o m w h i c h t o c h o o s e , i e . t h e k i l l i n g o f t h e v i l l a i n w i t h o u t a f i g h t , a n d t h e e x p u l s i o n o f t h e v i l l a i n . H o w e v e r , i t i s i n t e r e s t - i n g t o n o t e t h a t t h e H I f u n c t i o n s r e m a i n i n r e l a t i v e l y t i g h t p a i r s , e x c e p t i n o n e i n s t a n c e , w h e r e w e h a v e H 2 1 ^ , a n d i n t h i s c a s e t h e m y t h s t a t e s t h a t W o l v e r i n e M a n c a n n o t f i g h t b a c k . H o w e v e r H 2 T 2 w o u l d . a l s o b e a c c e p t a b l e . W e s h o u l d p o i n t o u t t h a t i n f i v e o f t h e s i x H 2 f u n c t i o n s , c o m p e t i t i o n o r c o n t e s t e n t a i l s t h e o u t w i t t i n g o f a n a n t a g o n i s t a s o p p o s e d t o a s t r a i g h t f o r e w a r d b a t t l e . A l t h o u g h t h e h e r o l o s e s t h e c o m p e t i t i o n i n t a l e # 4 , d i s - h a r m o n y i s n o t c r e a t e d , a s U s a k i n d j i i s a b l e t o t a k e r e v e n g e . M N , a d i f f i c u l t t a s k a n d i t s s o l u t i o n s o m e t i m e s f o u n d b y i t s e l f i n t a l e s , o r a s a m o v e I I s e q u e n c e , d o e s n o t o c c u r i n t h e B e a v e r m y t h s . F u n c t i o n K , t h e l i q u i d a t i o n o f l a c k o r m i s f o r t u n e i s f o u n d t e n t i m e s i n s e v e n B e a v e r c o r p o r a . O f t h e 1 3 a v a i l a b l e m o t i f s , a l s o i n c l u d i n g t h e g e n e r a l f u n c t i o n , o n l y t w o a r e e m p l o y e d , K 1 , d i r e c t a c q u i s i t i o n t h r o u g h t h e 3 a p p l i c a t i o n o f f o r c e o r c u n n i n g , e m p l o y e d n i n e t i m e s , a n d K , a c q u i s i t i o n a c h i e v e d w i t h t h e h e l p o f a n e n t i c e m e n t o f d e c o y s , e m p l o y e d o n c e . T h e m a j o r - i t y o f t h e m o t i f s w e r e n o t a s " a p p r o p r i a t e a s K " * s e e m e d t o b e . F o r e x a m p l e n o n e r e l a t e d t o t h e u s e o f m a g i c a l a g e n t s w e r e u s e d ; t h e r e f o r e , m o t i f s s u c h a s m i s f o r t u n e , i s d o n e a w a y w i t h i n s t a n t l y t h r o u g h t h e u s e o f a m a g i c a l a g e n t , K , p o v e r t y , i s d o n e a w a y w i t h t h r o u g h t h e u s e o f a m a g i c a l a g e n t , a n d K , t h e b r e a k i n g o f a s p e l l , w e r e e m p l o y e d . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t K " * i s u s e d i n a l l t h e U s a k i n d j i t a l e s e x c e p t t a l e # 7 , w h e r e K F i s u s e d . W e f i n d t h a t t h i s c o m b i n e d f u n c t i o n o c c u r s i n t h e t h r e e t a l e s t h a t d o n o t e m p l o y K f u n c t i o n . K F " * , t h e o b j e c t o f t h e s e a r c h i s t r a n s f e r r e d , i s e m p l o y e d t w i c e i n t w o d i f f e r e n t t a l e s , w h i l e K F 2 , t h e o b j e c t o f t h e s e a r c h i f p o i n t e d o u t , 62 7 occurs twice i n one t a l e , and KF', the object of the search i s captured, i s used once. We might take notice that k and KF do not occur together i n the same t a l e . Also, KF, in.four out of f i v e instances, completes a DE sequence conversely. Function K i s more often found i n conjunction with HI than with DEF. In only one t a l e do we f i n d both DEF |HI and K t o - gether i n the same move. According to Propp, the function, or return of the hero, i s accomplished i n the same form as an a r r i v a l . We f i n d ten "T functions, or departures, and only f i v e returns. However, i n only two tales do we have a departure without a return. In these Usakindji t a l e s , i t i s implied by the nature of the myth that Usakindji would merely continue on his journey. In the Beaver tales the return was not as obvious as the departure, and therefore, was only employed where mentioned i n the myth. According to Propp, the return of the hero i s accomplished i n the same form as aedeparture. Considering the f i v e tales that employ,T and -l , the hero does i n fact return i n the same way that he departed, although as stated e a r l i e r , not as much mention i s given t h i s action. Propp also states that a return indicates a surmounting of space, which i s not always true i n the case of a departure, as t h i s also designates the route of the hero, whether or not there i s a s p a t i a l transference of the hero. Therefore, these two functions do not seem to be exactly correlated and thus they would not be expected to.appear equally. In myths #7, 8 and 10, which are a l l Usakindji t a l e s , we do not f i n d either a departure or return function. Tale #4 i s the only Usakindji t a l e that employs t h i s pair appropriately. The functions of pursuit and rescue w i l l be considered together, although the motifs f o r each are not sequentially correlated. Pursuit, or Pr an attempt to destroy the hero, i s found i n t a l e s #1 and 9, while rescue, or Rs^, rescue or salvation from being destroyed, and Rs^, series of transformations 63 i n t o animals, plants, and stones, are present i n t a l e s 1 and 9 r e s p e c t i v e l y . Although there are seven pursuit motifs and ten rescue motifs from which to choose, some of these seem to be too p a r t i c u l a r to f i t the Beaver corpora. It i s also i n t e r e s t i n g to note that neither of the t a l e s i n which pursuit and rescue are found are Usakindji t a l e s . Recognition of the hero or function Q i s found only twice i n one t a l e . In t h i s instance, the hero was recognized by his brother only a f t e r he assumed h i s human form, as opposed to that of the moose. Ac t u a l l y , t h i s function i s employed f o r lack of a better one, as t h i s function does not seem p a r t i c u l a r l y important to the main part of the t a l e i n which i t i s found. Furthermore, Q does not correspond to function J,, branding or marking of the hero, as Propp mentions i t does i n some cases. Transfiguration i s also.only.used twice., on^e i n tale.#2 and once i n t a l e #9. In both cases, T 1, new p h y s i c a l appearance, i s employed. The other motifs of t h i s f u n c t i o n , such as the b u i l d i n g of a palace, new garments, humorous and r a t i o n a l i z e d forms, do not manifest themselves. Punishment, U, of the v i l l a i n occurs seven times i n the s i x Beaver . t a l e s . Propp states that u s u a l l y only the v i l l a i n M the second move and the f a l s e hero are punished, while the f i r s t v i l l a i n i s punished only i n those cases i n which a b a t t l e and pursuit are absent from the story. (Propp, 1968:63). Otherwise, the v i l l a i n i s k i l l e d i n b a t t l e or perishes during p u r s u i t . The few Beaver myths we have in d i c a t e compliance with t h i s . For example i n t a l e #7, we see that Moon Man i s punished i n the l a s t move, whereas he i s pardoned i n the f i r s t move. In f i v e out of s i x instances, the v i l l a i n i s punished i n the second move as opposed to the f i r s t move. In the one myth where the v i l l a i n 64. i s p u n i s h e d i n t h e f i r s t m o v e , r a t h e r t h a n t h e s e c o n d m o v e , t h e r e i s a q u e s - t i o n a s t o w h e t h e r t h i s s h o u l d b e t w o s e p a r a t e m y t h s . F u r t h e r m o r e , w e s e e t h a t f u n c t i o n U d o e s n o t o c c u r i n e i t h e r o f t h e o n e m o v e t a l e s , n o r i n t h e o n e t h r e e m o v e t a l e . H o w e v e r , t h i s t h r e e m o v e t a l e i s a r a t h e r i n c o m p l e t e v e r s i o n o f a m u l t i - H n o v e t a l e . F u n c t i o n W , w e d d i n g a n d a c c e s s i o n t o t h e t h r o n e , a l s o f o r m s t h e d e n o u e m e n t a l o n e w i t h U . T w o W m o t i f s a r e f o u n d i n t w o d i f f e r e n t m y t h s , o n e i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h a U f u n c t i o n a n d o n e n o t . B o t h W f u n c t i o n s r e f e r t o W ° . m o n e t a r y r e w a r d a n d o t h e r f o r m s o f m a t e r i a l g a i n a t t h e d e n o u e m e n t , a s o p p o s e d t o t h e o t h e r s i x m o t i f s . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t t h e m y t h s e n d w i t h a f o r m o f p u n i s h m e n t m o r e o f t e n t h a n t h e y d o a f o r m o f m a r r i a g e . T h i s W f u n c t i o n i n b o t h m y t h s r e f e r s t o a g e n e r a l g a i n f o r o t h e r s , i e , i n T a l e #5, t h e a n i m a l s a r e g i v e n t h e i r f a t , a n d i n t a l e #7, t h e m o o n i s p l a c e d i n t h e s k y . O f P r o p p ' s t h i r t y - o n e f u n c t i o n s , s i x a r e n o t u t i l i z e d . T h e s e a r e 0, u n r e c o g n i z e d a r r i v a l , L , C l a i m s o f f a l s e h e r o , M , d i f f i c u l t t a s k a n d N , s o l u t i o n , J , b r a n d i n g o r m a r k i n g o f t h e h e r o , a n d E x , e x p o s u r e o f t h e f a l s e h e r o . O n e m i g h t . , a l s o n o t e t h a t 0L f o r m a p a i r a s d o M N a n d J E x . W i t h r e g a r d s t o M N , P r o p p n o t e s t h a t H I i s a t y p i c a l f i r s t m o v e w h i l e M N i s a t y p i c a l s e c o n d o r r e p e a t e d m o v e . I n t h e B e a v e r t w o m o v e t a l e s , H I i s f o u n d o n l y t w i c e i n t h e f i r s t m o v e , i n t h e o t h e r f i v e t a l e s , H I i s f b u n d i n t h e s e c o n d m o v e . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e a l s o t h a t t h e D E F s e q u e n c e s i s f o u n d i n t h r e e o f t h e f i v e t a l e s ' f i r s t m o v e s . S i n c e t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e - t w e e n M N , H I , a n d D E F i s s o m e t i m e s v e r y v a g u e , w e c a n u n d e r s t a n d h o w D E F c a n a l s o b e c o n s i d e r e d a l o n g w i t h M N a n d H I . 0 a n d L a r e n o t e m p l o y e d i n t h e m y t h s a s n o n e o f t h e s t o r i e s c o n - t i n u e i n a n y d e t a i l a f t e r t h e c l i m a x o f t h e t a l e . U s u a l l y t h e B e a v e r t a l e s 65 a r e r e s o l v e d r a t h e r q u i c k l y a f t e r t h i s p o i n t . J a n d E x a r e a l s o , t o a d e g r e e , a n o t h e r e l a b o r a t i o n t h a t t h e B e a v e r m y t h s d o n o t i n d u l g e i n . A l t h o u g h E x i s s u p p o s e d l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h Q , r e c o g n i t i o n , i t i s n o t f o u n d a s a p a i r i n t h e B e a v e r t a l e s . X , f o r u n c l e a r o r a l i e n f o r m s , i s e m p l o y e d o n c e i n t h e B e a v e r m y t h s i n t a l e # 2 . T h i s f u n c t i o n c o u l d b e r e g a r d e d a s a f o r m o f r e w a r d m o r e t h a n a n y t h i n g e l s e , a s t h e e n d o f t h e t a l e s t a t e s t h a t W a b s h u p e r f o r m e d a s e r v i c e t o