Oops . . Speaking as an Ojibwe 2-spirit person I would like to clarify that we (persons) are not considered animate + inanimate. Our language Anishinaabemowin treats nouns differently and switches verb forms if something is considered animate or inanimate. An example would be that a rock is animate as s/he has a spirit, however a table is an inanimate noun. People and all beings are always animate. In all other respects, this is a very good lecture. Consistent with historic and contemporary knowledge found in our communities if we have the interest and understanding to seek it out.
Really good information. Very interesting.
How do we not know this isnt a form of romancing the native
Because as i pursue this information, it is all pretty general
47:18 term coined in 1990
Oops . . Speaking as an Ojibwe 2-spirit person I would like to clarify that we (persons) are not considered animate + inanimate. Our language Anishinaabemowin treats nouns differently and switches verb forms if something is considered animate or inanimate. An example would be that a rock is animate as s/he has a spirit, however a table is an inanimate noun.
People and all beings are always animate.
In all other respects, this is a very good lecture. Consistent with historic and contemporary knowledge found in our communities if we have the interest and understanding to seek it out.