hau/puff 150 On teaching o and a

Click Here!
On teaching o and a
Some theory and practice
Peter Cleave
The present paper sets out to review some recent thinking on the o and a categories of possession. The positions of Biggs, Hohepa, Thornton, Moorfield, Foster and myself are considered.
What are these categories of possession? Thornton (1998) has an excellent summary the first two points of which are;
1 possession is conveyed in two forms one consisting of or containing the vowel a and the other the vowel o.
2 In English the relationship is often indicated by of or by 's without any difference of meaning.
Beyond this point there is general consensus with one or two points of conjecture to which I will return about when to use o and when to use a. There is not he same agreements about why they are used when they are.

For example Biggs says that this difference is a distinction which can best be expressed by the terms dominance and subordinance. He gives the example;

Te waiata a te tangata to refer to a song that he person made or created and over which he or she is dominant.

This is followed by he example;
Te waiata o te tangata which refers to a song about or concerning the person and here, Biggs' argument goes, the man is subordinate.

This might be called he standard model of explanation and in her discussion Thorton rightly mentions John Moorfield (1988) who adds to the model set out by Biggs by saying the possessor may be in control or active or superior to what is owned. Moorfield so broadens the idea of dominance. Similarly he widens and further defines the idea of subordinance by saying that the o category should be used when there is no control over the relationship or is subordinate, passive or inferior to what is owned.

Foster (1987:56) goes a little further with this model by suggesting that there is an underlying principle involved whereby the a forms might be seen as active as they are used for people and things over which you have authority, control or power. By contrast the o form might be seen as passive in that it is used for people or things that have authority, control or influence over you. Foster says that the o form is also used for parts of things, feelings and abstractions or qualities.

Hohepa (1993) in some respects starts to talk about a distinct if not altogether different model. The thing that sets Hohepa apart is his emphasis on location. Hesays that the easiest way to choose the right possessive marker is to work out the relationship between the possession and the possessor and there are only two questions necessary these being:
1 Is the relationship based on location in which case use o and
2 If location is not relevant is the relationship based on control in which case use a

Control is fairly straightforward and comes in a line, as it were, through the thinking of Biggs, Moorfield and Foster as set out above. As argued below Hohepa does have some interesting and important perspectives to offer on control.

Location according to Hohepa has a number of interrelated
meanings these being:
1 The possession has a location in time and sace as with nga ra o mua, the days of the past
2 The possession is part of the possessor physically, personally or spiritually

An example of the physical is te kakau o te hoe, the handle of the paddle
Other examples given by Hohepa are;
ooku ringaringa, my hands
ngaa wairua o oona tuupuna, the spirits of his ancestors
te hinu o te paraoa, the oil of the whale
te reka o te huka, the sweetness of the sugar
te kawa o te marae, the custom of the marae
toona pootae, his hat
te kai o te moana, the food of the sea
te kahu o Mere, the cloak of Mere
te kooti o te tangata, the man's coat
tooku hoa wahine, my wife
tooku hoa taane, my husband
tooku tuakana, my older brother

3 The possession acts as a location for the possessor. Here Hohepa refers to transport usually referred to by others as means of transport.

With respect to control Hohepa generally follows other commentators but he has some interesting angles of discussion in five discussion points;

1 When the possessor carries or moves the possession
Te kete a Mere, Mary's kit
2 The possessor rules, controls, orders or dominates the possession
Nga pononga a te rangatira, The chief's servants
Hohepa uses a gerund in another example:
Te patunga a Kupe i te wheke, the killing of the octopus by Kupe.
3 Where the possessor initiates or produces the possession
Nga mahi a ngaa tuupuna, the works of the ancestors
4 Where the possessor and possession have an equal relationship
Te wahine a Tu Whakairiora, The wife of Tu Whakairiora
Te taane a Ruataupare, The husband of Ruataupare
5 Where here is no control, that is if the possessor does not carry or move or rule, control, dominate, initiate or produce he possession you must choose o as the marker
Here Hohepa gives two examples using gerunds;
Te rironga o te wahine, the taking of the woman
Te matenga o te hoariri, the defeat of the enemy
and then
Ngaa tuupuna o te wahine, the ancestors of the woman
Te Kuini o nga iwi, the Queen of the people

It might be argued that all explanations of the o and a categories of possession are influenced by culture. Agathe Thornton does not dwell on such positions found in anthropology as the Sapir- Whorf hypothesis but she does offer a very good discussion of how tapu and noa might apply to the use of the a and o forms. Water takes o for example because it is tapu. There is an intriguing suggestion which Thornton takes from Bruce Biggs to do with the autonomy of parts of the body. There is also a good introduction of work not usually discussed in this area such as that by Schirres.

My own approach to the teaching of these categories has been to follow the sequence below.

To begin with The student is shown that here are two nominal or noun phrases involved;
eg te whare and te tangata
or te kai and te tangata
and that to connect these phrases as in the house of the man or the food of the man then o or a has to be inserted between the two phrases.

The student is then given four steps.

Step One
Part to whole
te wahanga o te mea, the part of the thing
te waewae o te teepu, the leg of the table

Step Two
Dominance
te kuri a te tangata, the dog of the person

Step Three
Subordinance
te tupuna o te tangata, the elder of the person

Step Four
Means of transport
te waka o te tangata, the canoe of the person

A discussion of approaches

Biggs starts with dominance and subordinance. Foster begins with active and passive, Hohepa with location and control. Thornton starts with tapu and noa. My own approach is to start with part to whole relationships and then to proceed to other steps usually dominance and then subordinance and then means of transport. I try to teach each step separately though and sometimes teach means of transport or subordinance before dominance. The main thing I have found is that part to whole is always a good step to begin with as the student seems to find the propositions involved reasonable.

My experience has been that any approach involving one general principle tends to confuse the student. Having said that I have found that when a lot of time is pent early on the teaching on part to whole relationships then the teaching seems to go better. In this sense my method might imply that the rest of the steps are variations from a part to whole, unit of a system approach.

It might be suggsted that things either fit into a part to whole relationship in which case they take o or they do not in which case they might take a. This might be like Hohepa's notion of location but I have found that students, when faced with, say, he phrase;
te waewae o te teepu, the leg of the table
can relate better to the idea of part to whole in such cases than to location which seems to make the hesitate.
This emphasis on part to whole is not offered as an over-arching explanation. Means of transport I find still needs to be taught on its own as a separate step. One reason for this may be that some of the terms used in other methods tend to confuse students. Foster's active and passive are good to use in revision work but not to begin with. Hohepa's location is hard to get across at times and even dominance and subordinance can be tricky at times.

I teach thoughts and feelings in steps two and three. In step two I suggest that if a thought is an opinion worked out by the speaker then it should take a.
If the thought has come to he speaker in the sense that it merely occurred to that person then it might best take o.
te whakaaro a te tangata, the thought (opinion) of the person
te whakaaro o te tangata, the thought of the person

The latter indicates thoughts or feelings as they naturally occur or come to a person. If a person's conscious, creative input is involved then the a category might be taken.

Some things remain awkward to teach or te learn. The gerund is a case in point. Do you say te haerenga o or a te tangata? When you do not have an over-arching explanatory theory then you can have, I suppose, loose ends...



Bibliography
Bauer, Winifred 1997 The Reed Reference Grammar of Maori, Auckland, Reed Books
Biggs, B 1969 Let's Learn Maori A. H. and A. W. Reed
Cleave, Peter 2000 The Nurturing Shield; a collection of Essays on the Maori language, Napier, Campus Press
Foster, John 1987 He Whakamarama; a New Course in Maori, Auckland, Heinemann
Karena-Holmes, David 1997 Maori Language: understanding the grammar Auckland, Reed Books
Ngata, H. M. 1993 English-Maori Dictionary Wellington, Te Pou Taki Korero, Learning Media

Peter Cleave